Posted by Matthew Barber on Sunday, September 1st, 2013

Political Intrigue Surrounding Bombing in Tripoli, Lebanon

The aftermath of the Aug. 23 bombings in Tripoli, Lebanon continues to develop, with tensions escalating to a new high. One week ago, two bombings occurred in separate Tripoli neighborhoods. Initially, people assumed that the bombings were in retaliation for the earlier explosion that had targeted the southern Dahieh suburb of Beirut, a Shi’i enclave, on Aug. 15. (After that attack, videos circulated online of Sunnis celebrating in Tripoli, passing out candies on the street.) This remains a general assumption. Later, the theory began to emerge that the targets of the Tripoli bombings were two men: Ashraf Rifi (a pro-Syrian opposition Lebanese general and former head of Lebanese Internal Security Forces) and Salim al-Rifa’i (a leading Salafi who had called for jihad against the Syrian army at the beginning of the battle in Qusayr). Each bomb targeted a mosque during Friday prayers, one of which was located near Ashraf Rifi’s house. The mosques targeted were frequented by Tripolitans with a March 14th / pro-Syrian opposition alignment.

Government commissioner to the Military Tribunal, Judge Sakr Sakr, charged on Friday Sheikh Hashem Minkara and detainees Sheikh Mustafa Ahmad Gharib and Mustafa Houry, of forming an armed group to attack civil and military institutions.
Suspects were also charged of creating a terrorist cell and bombing the two mosques in Tripoli.
Sakr also pressed charges against Syrian captain Mohammad Ali for installing car bombs and killing people.
He charged prisoner, Sheikh Hashem Minkara, of hiding information regarding Tripoli’s explosions

The story of how these particular men were picked up by the Lebanese authorities is interesting. Sheikh Gharib and Sheikh Minqara are Sunni Islamist religious leaders in Tripoli with a pro-Syrian regime political alignment. They belong to the Tawhid political movement (or Islamic Unification Movement), one of the original Islamist movements in Lebanon, started by Sa’id Shaaban and very powerful in Tripoli during the civil war. Minqara is infamous in Tripoli for allegedly burying communists and leftists alive during the civil war. After a long period of fighting, the Tawhid movement reached an agreement with the Syrian regime and eventually moved in a pro-regime direction, in the 1980s. They have since splintered after many became disillusioned with becoming so intimate with the Syrian regime. Sheikh Gharib and Sheikh Minqara represent the small surviving group that remains pro-regime and opposes the March 14th Coalition in Tripoli.

http://www.lebanonfiles.com/gallery/album/276

According to an article from al-Akhbar (portions of which we will translate directly or paraphrase in the following), which relies on leaks from Lebanese media sources, Sheikh Gharib was approached 6 months ago by a Syrian intelligence officer named Mohammed Ali who asked him to start following the movements of 4 men: Ashraf Rifi, Salim al-Rifa’i, Khalid Addahir, and Mustafa Alloush (the last two are MPs of the Future movement [Hariri block], both very supportive of the Syrian opposition and always advocating their cause). After being approached by Ali, Gharib went to Sheikh Minqara and told him what the Syrian officer had requested of him. Minqara told him not to comply and to cut off all contact with that officer. Minqara refused to help because he didn’t want to become involved.

After this conversation, Gharib spoke to another man, Mustafa Houry, relaying what had transpired with Mohammed Ali. Houry relayed this information to Lebanese security, which has formed the basis for suspicion toward Gharib following the bombings, which seem to have targeted at least some of the individuals that Syrian intelligence wanted to track, even though there may not be clear evidence as to who exactly conducted the bombing. Even though Gharib and Minqara may have avoided participation with the Syrians (if they were indeed those behind the bombings), the position of the Lebanese authorities is that they had prior knowledge about the plot with which they did not come forward.

After the bombings in Tripoli, a youtube video circulated showing a bearded man on a cellphone. Media speculation identified this man as Sheikh Gharib, and an official narrative was promoted alleging his presence at the site of the bombing. This occurred in conjunction with his arrest. The official narrative was forced to change after another video was circulated by al-Jadid TV in which another man identifies himself as the man on the cellphone in the original video. He and his friend both speak on this video, claiming that they were praying in the mosque when the bomb went off. The original post-bombing footage and the interview with these two witnesses is combined in this video:

The bombed mosque from the street:

http://www.lebanonfiles.com/gallery/album/276

And inside:

http://www.lebanonfiles.com/gallery/album/276

Video footage from inside the mosque at the moment of the bombing can be seen here.

Though some are calling this a revenge attack for the Dahieh bombing, the event in Dahieh occurred earlier this month, whereas it would seem that planning for the Aug. 23 Tripoli bombings started 6 months ago—if this narrative about Syrian security approaching the Tripolitan sheikhs is correct. Aspects of this case parallel that of Michel Smaha, who was arrested a year ago this month. Some will interpret the Tripoli bombings as a continuation of the Syrian regime’s efforts to use terrorism for political influence in Lebanon—after failing with Smaha, then pursuing the same objectives through other assets a few months later, culminating in this month’s attacks. Smaha is still in jail after a year, and the trial has been postponed until December. For articles on the Smaha story, see: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Ultimately, these events will serve to place an uncomfortable level of pressure on those people of Tripoli who have a pro-Syrian regime political affiliation. After this bombing, it will be easier for their opponents to frame them as a dangerous element that is up to no good, and increase the threat level that they face within the highly-charged and tense environment of northern Lebanon.

“Americans see us as Bin Laden, as terrorists,” he says with a sneer. “But when the world talks about Hezbollah, they call them a militia. We have brains. We know the Americans are behind everything that’s going on. They’re sitting watching the blood of Muslims being spilled, and they turn a blind eye.”

Chemical Weapons and Responses

Russia will send two ships to the east Mediterranean to strengthen its naval presence because of the “well-known situation” there, Interfax news agency said on Thursday referring to the Syria crisis.

The agency quoted a source in the armed forces’ general staff as saying an anti-submarine vessel and a missile cruiser would be sent in the coming days because the situation “required us to make some adjustments” in the naval force.

… Although it was not possible to say for certain if they are bringing weapons, the number of ships travelling to Syria from a Ukrainian port used by Russia’s arms export monopoly has increased sharply since April. …

Even if proven, the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government does not tip the balance in favor of U.S. military intervention. To think otherwise places undue weight on the weapons Assad’s forces may have used and ignores the many reasons that U.S. intervention is still unwise.

Of course it is not good that Assad’s forces may have used chemical weapons, but it is not obvious why the choice of weaponry changes the calculus of U.S. interests in this case. The brutal nature of the Assad regime has been apparent for decades, and its forces have already killed thousands with conventional means. Does it really matter whether Assad is killing his opponents using 500-pound bombs, mortar shells, cluster munitions, machine guns, icepicks or sarin gas? Dead is dead, no matter how it is done.

Proponents of action argue that the U.S. must intervene to defend the norm against chemical weapons. Using nerve agents like sarin is illegal under international law, but they are not true “weapons of mass destruction.” Because they are hard to use in most battlefield situations, chemical weapons are usually less lethal than non-taboo weapons like high explosive. Ironically we would therefore be defending a norm against weapons that are less deadly than the bombs we would use if we intervene. This justification would also be more convincing if the U.S. government had not ignored international law whenever it got in the way of something Washington wanted to do.

And intervention is still a bad idea. Airstrikes cannot eliminate Assad’s chemical arsenal and are unlikely to tip the balance in favor of the rebels. And even if they did, this situation would give Assad a bigger incentive to use these weapons more widely. Assad’s fall would create a failed state and unleash a bitter struggle among the various rebel factions. …

… Obama may be tempted to strike because he foolishly drew a “red line” over this issue and feels his credibility is now at stake. But following one foolish step with another will not restore that lost standing. …

The powerful brother of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is suspected of authorizing the chemical weapons attack that killed hundreds of Syrian civilians, according to a United Nations official who monitors armed conflicts in the region.

Maher al-Assad, the younger brother of the president, commands the regime’s Republican Guard and controls the Syrian Army’s 4th Armored Division, an elite unit that the opposition says launched the Aug. 21 attack on the eastern Ghouta suburbs of the capital, Damascus.

The use of chemical weapons may have been a brash action by Maher al-Assad rather than a strategic decision by the president, according to the UN official, who asked not to be named.

Identifying the chain of command behind the chemical attack would go into calculations about who, what and how to strike in any retaliatory action, the UN official said. If Maher al-Assad is the culprit, for example, a Republican Guard stronghold may be targeted rather than a presidential facility, the official said.

Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, doubts that such an important action — openly defying U.S. President Barack Obama’s “red line” against the use of chemical weapons — would be done without Bashar al-Assad’s approval.

“It’s inconceivable to me,” Landis said in a phone interview. “There has been nothing to indicate that Bashar is just a figurehead.”

Shadowy Figure

For now, Maher’s role is largely a matter of conjecture. He’s a shadowy figure with a reputation for loyalty to his brother and brutality toward their opponents. Early in the uprising, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly denounced his “savagery.”

“I don’t doubt that he is ruthless, but I also don’t doubt that Bashar is ruthless,” said Landis. “Is he more ruthless than Bashar? I think that is a useless line of inquiry because they are both killing people with abandon.”

… “Maher is the knee-capper in this operation,” said Landis. “He is in charge of doing the heavy lifting of punishing people and preserving the regime through military means.”

“Why Would Assad Cross the Red Line right when the UN inspection team was visiting?” asks Free Halab. The answer: because the team was never free of the Syrian regime’s control.

The UN team was only a couple of miles away, but they may have just as well been on the other side of the planet. Assad decides where, when and how they can or cannot go whether they were let into Syria or not. By the time Assad did allow them entry [yesterday only to Moadamiye in Western Ghouta and today…] it might have been too little, and already too late.

Briefing Parliament, Foreign Minister Emma Bonino called the chemical attack a “war crime” but said her government wouldn’t support military action without U.N. Security Council authorization. She said: “Italy would not actively take in any military action … beyond the context of the Security Council, which for us is and remains the only point of legal reference that cannot be ignored.”

“For every chemical rocket that had fallen on our people in Damascus, one of their villages will, by the will of God, pay for it,” Abu Mohammad al-Golani said in the recording posted on YouTube.
“On top of that we will prepare a thousand rockets that will be fired on their towns in revenge for the Damascus Ghouta massacre.”

Assad’s oldest son, Hafez, weighs in on the prospect of getting bombed, on Facebook: here and here

Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned. And that is the major reason why American officials now say they’re certain that the attacks were the work of the Bashar al-Assad regime — and why the U.S. military is likely to attack that regime in a matter of days.

But the intercept raises questions about culpability for the chemical massacre, even as it answers others: Was the attack on Aug. 21 the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds? Or was the strike explicitly directed by senior members of the Assad regime? “It’s unclear where control lies,” one U.S. intelligence official told The Cable. “Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?” …

The Syrian regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons would not be the first war crime committed by the regime since the start of the uprising in March 2011. Summary executions, torture, and indiscriminate shelling of civilians have been recurrent elements of the government’s response to the uprising. Indeed, opposition armed groups have also been guilty of war crimes, including summary executions and torture. War crimes are nothing new in this conflict. But now, following this most recent allegation, politicians, analysts and journalists are all talking about one thing: possible military intervention.

I’m not here to question claims of fact. Let’s assume that chemical weapons were used by the Syrian regime in Ghouta, and that the attack killed over 1,400 people, as the US claims. This would constitute yet another war crime. So why act now, in particular?

There are two lines of argument, which seem to be often confused. One follows a logic of punishment. The other invokes principles of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect. The UK government’s (defeated) motion on Thursday tried to link these two approaches. But they should be kept separate.

The Syrian government should be punished for the war crime of using chemical weapons, runs the first view. States have exhausted most of their non-military coercive tools — condemnations, economic sanctions, embargoes, referrals to the Security Council and to the ICC — and so military action is, so it is argued, the only option left for punishing the Syrian government. The logic behind the punishment is firstly one of reprisal, and secondly and more importantly, one of deterrence — both to deter the Syrian regime from using such weapons again and to deter others from using such weapons. It is this wider perspective, beyond the Syria conflict, which explains the buzz of debate and action since this latest allegation emerged.

The use of chemical weapons shocked the world’s conscience during the First World War. Subsequently the Geneva Protocol banning the use of chemical weapons was drawn up in 1925, mentioning that such weapons are “justly condemned by the general opinion of the civilised world.” Ever since, the use of chemical weapons has been a major international taboo, which has (surprisingly, perhaps) rarely been broken. This is why their use constituted a “red line” for Obama. For him and other leaders, the idea that a state can use such banned weapons with impunity (let alone against its own people), is an unbearable affront to the conscience of the civilised world, which it is a legal — and moral — obligation to punish. As John Kerry said last week, “What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any code of morality.” This goes some way to explaining why military intervention is being so actively considered at this particular moment.

So much for the theory of the punitive strike. Now for the practice. The idea is to carry out “surgical”, “limited” military strikes, so that the cost for the Syrian regime of using chemical weapons again is too great. This is the objective of deterrence. Of course, the objective of reprisal is fulfilled by any strike that harms the government.

But what worries me are these two words that are often used to describe the proposed military strikes — “limited” and “surgical”. Neither is ever defined. What is a limited bombing campaign? Is it limited in the means it uses (e.g. only air strikes)? Or in the time it lasts? Or in what it targets? Or in its objectives? Probably a combination of these, but it is not clear. It is left up to military planners; the targets chosen for their missiles will not be the subject of public consultation. And the difficulty is that if one is attacking through a logic of deterrence, then always more can be justified: after all, who can determine with certainty what level of destruction will be necessary to deter the Syrian regime from using chemical weapons again? Is it possible that as the conventional military capacity of the regime is steadily worn down by punitive strikes dealt by a “coalition of the willing”, so its propensity to resort to chemical weapons might increase? Might the only sure deterrent be, in the final analysis, to remove the regime? This is the slippery slope argument against a punitive, deterrent strike.

Then there is this other word “surgical”. It indicates precision: targets will be determined with precision, and then “neutralised” with equal precision. But precision does not always mean accuracy. Mistakes are bound to happen, just as they did during the Nato interventions in Libya and Kosovo. This is an inevitable consequence of any military intervention. This would contribute to the civilian death toll. In addition, it would give Assad new arguments and impetus to continue his stand (what this Foreign Policy article charmingly calls the “PR catastrophe” consequence).

So: limited, surgical strikes to punish and deter the Syrian regime are an attractive option. The government of Syria is alleged to have committed another war crime, but this time of a different nature. It must be punished so that it does not use chemical weapons again, and importantly so that others aren’t tempted to use them either, thinking they too will escape punishment. But two elements count against this approach, the slippery slope towards full-blown regime change, and unintended civilian casualties. Perhaps the first difficulty could be overcome by setting down very strict parameters and objectives in advance. But the second issue is harder to get over: some civilian casualties could be justified if there was a high probability that the strikes would decisively deter the regime from using chemical weapons, thus preventing future civilian casualties. But, first, that a strictly limited intervention would achieve this is far from clear. And second, with so many being killed and wounded by conventional weapons, it seems arbitrary to set an objective of reducing casualties due only to chemical weapons (a point made by John Holmes in this Guardian piece). The UK government motion that was defeated proposed exactly this arbitrary objective: “this Resolution relates solely to efforts to alleviate humanitarian suffering by deterring use of chemical weapons and does not sanction any action in Syria with wider objectives.”

We come then to the second argument for military intervention: the responsibility to protect. State sovereignty implies responsibility: states have a a responsibility to protect their people. When a state fails in this duty, the principle of non-intervention in a sovereign state’s internal affairs gives way to the principle of international responsibility to protect. Arguably, this point was passed long ago in Syria. It is not this chemical attack that has tipped the number of civilian casualties from “acceptable” to “unacceptable”. This first condition for the application of the responsibility to protect principle is met, then: the Syrian state no longer protects its people, and therefore has forfeited its sovereignty.

For a military intervention to be justified by the “responsibility to protect”, several further conditions need to be met. First, the primary purpose of the intervention must be to prevent further human suffering (“right intention”). Second, military means must be a last resort; all non-military means must have been exhausted. Third, the scale and intensity of the military campaign should be the minimum necessary to ensure the prevention of human suffering that is intended (“proportionality”). And fourth, and most importantly perhaps, there must be a reasonable chance of halting the human suffering which justified the intervention, with the consequences of the intervention not likely to be worse than those of inaction.

Let’s grant that the first and second conditions are met in the current Syria scenario. There’s always room for debate on whether the prime motivation in these cases is really humanitarian, but let’s just assume it is here. The same goes for the second condition: one can always argue that further negotiations and diplomatic moves should be tried; all one can say is that so far not much has come of the various non-military measures that have been adopted, and there is no immediate prospect of success through such measures.

That brings us to the third and fourth conditions, which are intrinsically linked: to ensure reasonable prospects of success, the campaign may have to be massive, even going as far as changing the regime. There are two problems with such a massive campaign. It may well create more suffering than that which it was intended to halt. And — not to be overlooked — in the current post Afghanistan and Iraq climate, there is no appetite for a long, messy, costly regime-change-cum-nation-building exercise, especially in somewhere as complicated as Syria.

None of the current models of military intervention being proposed for Syria makes the case for how the intervention would have “reasonable prospects” of halting the human suffering in Syria without adding to it. Most talk is of those “limited”, “surgical” strikes. And this is where there is a confusion. In advocating this kind of limited military intervention, politicians rely on the principle of “responsibility to protect” and cite humanitarian motivations. But they do not make the case for how such strikes carry reasonable prospects of reducing human suffering in Syria. The only case advanced is the weak and arbitrary objective of reducing human suffering caused by chemical weapons (already discussed).

So much for the two lines of argument supporting a military strike, viz. punishment and the responsibility to protect. The latter is a non-starter: there is no stomach for a long, involved campaign, and in any case no-one can be sure of the unintended outcomes of such a campaign, especially with the proliferation of less than desirable armed opposition groups.

Politicians should stop couching intervention in humanitarian terms, as the argument can’t be made. Instead, those who wish to advocate intervention, should do so in terms of punishment and deterrence, being mindful that a single civilian casualty from such a campaign cannot be tolerated. But this strategy should not be presented on its own. It should be linked to a political strategy and a purely humanitarian strategy. The idea of using such strikes to push the Syrian regime and its allies towards political negotiations should be explored, and could be adduced as a further argument for a punitive kind of strike. I don’t know what precedents there are for the success of this sort of approach.

And, most importantly, politicians, analysts and journalists should put more emphasis on the purely humanitarian aspect of the conflict, in order to galvanise more financial support for aid to the 1.7 million refugees and several million internally displaced. This huge population of poor, displaced, dispossessed Syrians — and those who will join them — are those whom any military intervention would notionally be aimed at protecting. International efforts should be more concentrated on those who already need assistance. Talking and writing about helping families who have fled their homes seems to command fewer headlines than speculation about what kind of Tomahawk missiles US warships could fire from the eastern Mediterranean. But the long-term consequences of the conflict might well depend much more on how millions of homeless Syrians are helped to get back to normal life, than on the kind of munitions dropped on the Syrian Air Force intelligence headquarters.

… In 2003, Canada refused to join in the U.S.-led “coalition” and it proved to be a wise decision. It was based on a variety of arguments and on a firmly grounded policy with regard to international law, to Canada’s role in international action and to Canada’s understanding of history and the Middle East region. There was also little support among Canadians for joining the invasion.

The StephenHarper government lacks an informed and forward thinking policy on the Middle East. Aside from blindly supporting Israel at the expense of effective relations with Arab countries, its reactions to developments in that region are largely of the knee jerk variety. Virtually no long-term policy work has been done to prepare for these types of situations. Because of this, we could well acquiesce to requests from the U.S. and others to form a “coalition of the willing” in an attack against Syria, simply because we are asked, not because it has been thought through. It is noteworthy that when Canada refused to join the attack on Iraq in 2003, one of the people to criticize that decision was Stephen Harper.

It is deeply distressing to see the toll that the Syrian civil war has taken and continues to take on the Syrian people and the country. We all want to see that ended. But, the question one has to ask is whether attacking the Syrian regime will do that. …

The leaders of the Arab world on Tuesday blamed the Syrian government for a chemical weapons attack that killed hundreds of people last week, but declined to back a retaliatory military strike, leaving President Obama without the broad regional support he had for his last military intervention in the Middle East, in Libya in 2011.

Syrian authorities have moved prisoners from their jail cells to installations the government believes could be targets of western military strikes, pro-democracy activists in Damascus and the opposition said yesterday.

Where’s this all going?

Sometime back we wrote about revolutionary Syrians who had become disillusioned with the opposition to the point of abandoning the rebels and re-joining Syria’s army. Similarly, we are also hearing voices of frustration coming from long-time supporters of the Syrian regime, even those who have stood by the Syrian regime for over two years of conflict. One recent example came in a message received from a friend:

My sister has been at a hotel in Lebanon for nearly a year. Nearly 90 percent of the people living in it are Christian Syrians. I visited last December. Almost all have been die-hard supporters of Bashar and the regime. They have been depressed for a long time watching the news.

I just got a call from her telling me how jovial and happy the mood was today. The people suddenly feel that the USA is preparing for war. “But this may mean that the regime will fall,” I countered. “The people don’t care anymore. They just want this over. They want to go back. They have run out of money. They are done. War by the USA will put an end to this and this is why they are happy today. Something they have not experienced for a while,” she said.

For months we’ve had a poll question on the site that asks: “Will Syria maintain territorial integrity post-conflict?“Amazingly, the response percentages have hovered at exactly 50%-50% until just recently. Everyone’s trying to predict where this conflict is taking Syria and the regime, and what the eventual outcome will look like. Theories are abounding, and we hear many from readers, such as Yamin, who emailed us a list of what he considers possible:

(1) Syria to be ruled by the current Syrian Government as before March of 2011 – Impossible

(2) Syria to be ruled by a reformed government headed by the current Syrian Government – Possible and Likely

(3) Syria to be ruled by the Opposition headed by the Syrian Coalition – Possible but Unlikely

(4) Syria to be ruled by Islamists headed by the Syrian Coalition – Possible but Unlikely

(5) Syria to be ruled by extreme Islamists – Impossible

(6) Syria remains one state as we know it – Possible and Likely

(7) Syria splits into two – Possible but Unlikely

(8) Alawite State in the coast – Impossible

(9) Alawite State between the desert and the coast – Possible but Unlikely

1) Assad victory. Although this is more likely than before due to continued support from Iran and Russia, the entry of Hezbollah fighters into the fray, and continued fragmentation among the rebels, it is not very likely because the regime lacks the manpower and resources to reconquer all the territory lost. It does, however, have a stronger position than a few months ago, and has been consolidating its hold on the territory it controls.

2) Good rebel victory. At the moment, this likely needs significant outside assistance to happen. Iranian and Hezbollah aid has to be curtailed. A significant number of Alawites have to be convinced that they will be safe after they lay down their arms. And outside aid has to be delivered in a way that strengthens and consolidates moderate forces such that they take over the country. Moderates would rule inclusively and without retribution against losers. But this scenario looks very unlikely as of now because moderate forces are heavily fragmented and extremist groups have gained power in many opposition areas.

3) Bad rebel victory. In this case, extremist groups such as Jabhat al-Nusra, which has announced its allegiance to al-Qaida, take advantage of the curtailing of Iranian aid and foreign assistance to claim victory. This would lead to massive retribution and a rigid orthodoxy. It would also produce an even greater refugee crisis, as millions of Alawites and Christians flee into Lebanon and Turkey. The “good” rebels, such as the Free Syrian Army, the main rebel umbrella organization, should ideally exclude the extremist groups from any military or political coalition, but they are too powerful for this. Exclusion could also lead to greater conflict, or even a second civil war. In any case, what the good rebels think may be irrelevant: the extremists are better positioned to win the war. They have done relatively well in the fighting when compared to other rebel groups and have greater cohesion.

4) Stalemate. At this point, a stalemate is very likely. The two sides are not strong enough to control all or even most of the country. If either side makes significant gains, the other is likely to be reinforced from abroad. This would not necessarily be a bad thing, as a stalemate that went on for an extended period of time and showed both sides that they cannot win is the only way to encourage them to take negotiations seriously. And negotiations are the only conceivably way to end the war if no major power intervenes.

5) Country breakup. The longer the war goes on, the more likely this will happen. In some ways, it already has. The existing regime, backed by Alawites, many Christians, and some of the old Sunni elite, would retain control over a strip of land that included Damascus and much of the coast. It would be supported by Russia and Iran. Sunnis would control an equivalent amount of land, stretching from the northwest to the Iraqi border, including possibly Aleppo (see map). It would be backed by Sunni states, though divisions between these would have to be overcome (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey have backed different factions). The Druze would control the southeast, probably in alliance with the Sunnis. A Kurdish northeast might seek independence or some sort of alliance with Iraqi Kurdistan. This scenario might lead to peace faster except that neighbors would both oppose any division of the country and want to keep backing their particular client mini-state.

6) Regional conflict. The likelihood of this also increases the longer the war goes on. Lebanon and Iraq have already suffered from spillover: bombs have gone off in South Beirut and Tripoli in the past week and Sunni extremists have been strengthened in Iraq in recent months. It is not out of the realm of possibility that these trends will continue and a broad Sunni-Shiite conflict will engulf the whole Levant. This is the worst result, and would have even greater consequences for the region. Over 50 million people would be directly affected.

7) Chaos.This is the Somalia scenario. An extended period of statelessness and persistent conflict would institutionalize a war economy, and give emerging warlords, militia leaders, and criminal networks a vested interest in continuing the conflict. Those outside the country would be encouraged to reestablish their lives elsewhere, reducing the chance that they will ever return. Those within the country would increasingly be left without schooling or economic opportunity beyond the war effort. More would flee.

These seven scenarios are not completely separate from each other. Stalemate could, for instance, lead to greater spillover. The country’s breakup could be accompanied by chaos.

International Options

Although no outside power will intervene with enough force and staying power to end the conflict at this point, there are still a number of important low risk actions outsiders can take:

1) Red lines over the use of chemical weapons or other WMDs must be enforced. The United States should follow through on its threats or the use of these will increase, and many more civilians will suffer the consequences.

2) Regional contagion must be prevented. The international community should do more to bring together the leaders of the various factions in Lebanon and Iraq to work out their differences or at least agree to work together to minimize spillover before it is too late.

3) More must be done to unite and empower the moderate rebel groups. This is the only force whose victory could lead to reconciliation.

4) More thought ought to be undertaken to determine what structure of government might work in such a deeply divided country. Calls for elections are stale when trust is so low and the end of the war so far away.

5) A stalemate that leads to a ceasefire should be encouraged, as it is probably the best end result that is possible at this point. Peace negotiations will lead nowhere, but anything that reduces or ends the bloodshed should be considered.

Eventually the only answer for the country—and possibly the whole Levant region—is a heavily decentralized system of government that allows each local group or area to manage their own affairs in some form of weak confederacy until trust and trade can gradually recover enough so that people clamor for a more centralized system. Unfortunately, the modern state system, which empowers central governments and insists on rigid ways of organizing states and the divisions between them, will make it hard to take this route.

Syria Comment Exclusive:Kelly Flanagan has written a scholarly analysis on the Syria Conflict, attempting to predict future outcomes for the insurgency. Below is an introduction to the paper; to download Kelly’s entire analysis, click here: Ending Insurgency, Analyzing the Syrian Conflict

With the Syrian civil war continuing for nearly thirty months and diplomatic efforts stalling, what can the history of civil wars tell us to expect? Drawing from the study “How Insurgencies End,” by Ben Connable and Martin C. Libicki at the RAND Corporation, this paper discusses several possible components of uprisings-turned-insurgencies and correlates them with the likelihood of insurgent success. The paper analyzes each component in conjunction with the Syrian conflict. Factors discussed are: duration of the conflict, urbanization, available sanctuary for the insurgents, third party intervention for the government, third party intervention for the insurgents, networked or hierarchical military of the insurgency, and use of terrorism.

The duration of the conflict and the use of terrorism appear, thus far, to be inconclusive in determining the outcome of the war. Bashar al-Assad’s support from third party backers actually favors the success of the insurgents, as does the third party sanctuary the insurgents receive from Turkey. Favoring the regime, on the other hand, is the networked makeup of the insurgent army and the country’s high degree of urbanization.

The tipping-point factor that needs to be considered by policymakers is third party support on behalf of the insurgents. The correlation between third party intervention for the insurgents and their success is much higher than the success rate without external support. Whether third party military support remains status quo or is strategically augmented by the supporting parties is likely to be the main component in deciding whether or not a peace agreement or an insurgent victory is achieved.

Fighting between ISIS and the Ahfad al-Rasoul brigade for control of Raqqa – which fell out of the control of president Bashar Assad in March – has intensified over the last week. The battle culminated with the jihadist group detonating a car bomb early Wednesday at the city’s main train station, killing Rasoul commanders Abu Mazen and Fahd Hussein al-Kajwan.

Free Syrian Army leaders have acknowledged that the fighting between their brigades and Islamist rivals has reached a critical stage.

The FSA says the Islamists’ main concern is not to overthrow Assad, but to establish an Islamic state in Syrian territories.

Elizabeth O’Bagy and Thomas Pierret have both recently been making the argument that moderate forces are winning out over extremists in the Syrian opposition. Here are some examples:

Would arming moderate Syrian rebels reduce the influence of their radical counterparts? This question, which has been extensively debated by proponents and opponents of indirect military involvement in Syria, has perhaps become obsolete: backing the most pragmatic insurgent groups is what Saudi Arabia has been doing for months now, and it seems to work. …

… recent military developments show that Syrian insurgents have become increasingly dependent on state supporters for their logistics. Gone are the days when rebels could storm lightly defended regime positions with assault rifles and a few RPGs. The retreat of loyalist forces on heavily fortified bases last winter has required a major quantitative and qualitative increase in the opposition’s armament. This is something only foreign governments, not jihadi utopians, can offer. Given Saudi Arabia’s apparent determination to lead the way in that respect, this situation will probably continue to favor mainstream insurgents over their radical brothers in arms in the foreseeable future.

… The conventional wisdom holds that the extremist elements are completely mixed in with the more moderate rebel groups. This isn’t the case. Moderates and extremists wield control over distinct territory. Although these areas are often close to one another, checkpoints demarcate control. On my last trip into Syria earlier this month, we traveled freely through parts of Aleppo controlled by the Free Syrian Army, following roads that kept us at safe distance from the checkpoints marked by the flag of the Islamic State of Iraq. …

ISW

… Contrary to many media accounts, the war in Syria is not being waged entirely, or even predominantly, by dangerous Islamists and al Qaeda die-hards. The jihadists pouring into Syria from countries like Iraq and Lebanon are not flocking to the front lines. Instead they are concentrating their efforts on consolidating control in the northern, rebel-held areas of the country. …

The most notable trend in Syria in 2013 has been the increasing strategic supremacy of Islamist groups, particularly in the northern half of the country. Every major opposition military victory since September 2012 has been Islamist-led.

… This article identifies and profiles some of the most important non-state actors in Syria. It finds that the opposition remains severely fragmented. Although foreign-backed efforts to realize the long-standing goal of a central “Free Syrian Army” leadership for the mainstream insurgency have achieved some progress recently, the resulting Supreme Military Command has little internal cohesion and is held together almost entirely by outside funding. The Syrian regime has also begun to experience a fragmentation of its security apparatus, caused by its increased reliance on local and foreign militia forces, although these problems are still in their early stages. …

At approximately 3pm PST, the Syrian Electronic Army seemingly hacked into Twitter, Huffington Post and NY Times’ registry accounts altering contact details, and more significantly, DNS records. Modifying DNS records of a domain will allow SEA to redirect visitors to any site of their choosing.

First reported by Matthew Keys, this is the latest of many attacks by the pro-Syrian government computer hackers who align themselves with Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

The flurry of DNS hacks began when the group initially posted a tweet with a screenshot of the whois records for Twitter.com and a link for others to verify its authenticity…

Syria’s Western-backed political opposition plans to create the nucleus of a national army to bring order to the disparate rebel forces battling President Bashar al-Assad and counter the strength of al Qaeda-linked rebel brigades.

The latest attempt to unite the rebels coincides with fierce debates in Washington and other Western capitals over whether and how to boost support for Assad’s opponents after an alleged chemical weapons attack by government forces on Wednesday.

Extremists are increasingly dominating the Syrian rebellion, especially since the beginning of this year. This has significantly strengthened the position of the dictator, Bashar Al Assad, by validating his narrative about “Islamic terrorism” – that began as a fiction during the period of peaceful, unarmed protests but is now a reality that he is instrumental in shaping and driving.

… Those who argue against arming any of the rebels because of the strength of radical movements are citing the self-fulfilling prophecy, and grim logical consequences, of their own consistent “hands-off” policy recommendations: reluctance to support the FSA for fear of the emergence of extreme Islamists has inexorably and inevitably led to precisely that development.

An amazing moment of hope: a Syrian soldier drops his weapon and walks over to speak to the rebels, reminds everyone that they are all the same people. As with the other articles in this section, I was unable to post when it was timely, due to traveling. This story made the rounds quickly a month ago, but should be remembered, as it revealed an amazing moment of humanity. al-Arabiya: Syrian officer drops own arm, talks to rebels

At least 29,000 Syrians have flooded into northern Iraq since Thursday, the United Nations refugee agency said Monday, calling it one of the largest cross-border migrations since the Syrian conflict began in 2011. Officials said 20,000 crossed over on Thursday alone. More than 1.9 million Syrians have already sought refuge in neighboring countries; more than 180,000 are now in Iraq. (Aug. 19)

Among the journalists I know covering Syria, almost everyone is swearing off crossing the border and going inside the country. It’s not the threat of violence that’s stopping people, but the risk of kidnapping…

While the Egyptian Brotherhood makes global headlines and Tunisia’s Ennahda Party struggles to remain in power, very little is publicly known about the state of Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood. In recent weeks, much has been made of the decrease in the group’s influence over the Syrian National Coalition (SNC). In contrast, not a lot has been said on the Brotherhood’s actual influence inside Syria and its strategy for the revolution. How exactly does the movement plan on dealing with recent trends in the conflict, such as the rise of Islamic extremism in opposition ranks?

A series of interviews conducted with prominent Syrian Brotherhood members and other members of the opposition in Istanbul and Beirut reveal that the group is adapting to an increasingly fragmented Syria made up of competing centers of power. But even if it seems to be gaining some traction on the ground through humanitarian assistance, political activism and armed opposition, the Syrian Brotherhood is still facing enormous external and internal challenges. …

The group that “renounced violence” in an effort to gain political power is engaged in a full-scale campaign of terror against Egypt’s Christian minority. Brotherhood leaders have incited their followers to attack Christian homes, shops, schools and churches throughout the country. Samuel Tadros, an Egyptian scholar with the Hudson Institute, told me these attacks are the worst violence against the Coptic Church since the 14th century.

The news coming out of Egypt is staggering. USA Today reports that “forty churches have been looted and torched, while 23 others have been attacked and heavily damaged” in one week. According to the Coptic Orthodox and Catholic churches in Egypt, 160 Christian-owned buildings have also been attacked.

In one town, Islamists paraded three nuns on the streets like prisoners of war after burning their Franciscan school. The attackers tore a cross off the gate of the school and replaced it with an Islamist flag. The New York Timesdescribed hundreds of Islamists in one attack, “lashing out so ferociously that marble altars were left in broken heaps on the floor.”

Two security guards working on a tour boat owned by Christians were burned alive. An orphanage was burned down. The Catholic Bishop of Luxor told the Vatican news agency Tuesday that he has been trapped in his home for 20 days by Islamist mobs chanting “Death to the Christians!” “People who reside in the villages of the area that have nothing because food supplies are running out and people are afraid to leave the house,” he said.

For the first time in 1600 years, prayers were not held in the Virgin Mary and Priest Ibram Monastery, which includes three churches, one of which is an archaeological site. According to the local priest, they were destroyed by supporters of former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi. On one village street, Islamists painted a red X on Muslim stores and a black X on Christian stores, so attackers knew where to focus their rage. On Tuesday, there were reports that the Brotherhood declared Friday prayers to be held in an evangelical church in the town of Minya that has been converted to a mosque.

… A Brotherhood spokesman dismissed the wave of attacks as being perpetrated by “foolish boys” and alleged a conspiracy against his organization. But the Facebook page of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party is rife with false accusations meant to foment hatred against Copts, including the absurd claim that the Church has declared “war against Islam and Muslims” and justified the attacks by saying: “After all this, people ask why they burn the churches.” Then came a threat: “For every action there is a reaction.”

The Muslim Brotherhood has been inciting violence against the Copts in an effort to scapegoat the religious minority for the ouster of former president Mohamed Morsi. The FJP Facebook page is filled with the rhetoric the Brotherhood leaders have been using in their speeches at the sit-ins: “The pope of the Church is involved in the removal of the first elected Islamist president. The pope of the Church alleges Islamic Sharia is backwards, stubborn, and reactionary.” …

Omar Aziz (fondly known by friends as Abu Kamal) was born in Damascus. He returned to Syria from exile in Saudi Arabia and the United States in the early days of the Syrian revolution. An intellectual, economist, anarchist, husband and father, at the age of 63, he committed himself to the revolutionary struggle. He worked together with local activists to collect humanitarian aid and distribute it to suburbs of Damascus that were under attack by the regime. Through his writing and activity he promoted local self-governance, horizontal organization, cooperation, solidarity and mutual aid as the means by which people could emancipate themselves from the tyranny of the state. Together with comrades, Aziz founded the first local committee in Barzeh, Damascus.The example spread across Syria and with it some of the most promising and lasting examples of non-hierarchical self organization to have emerged from the countries of the Arab Spring.

In her tribute to Omar Aziz, Budour Hassan says, he “did not wear a Vendetta mask, nor did he form black blocs. He was not obsessed with giving interviews to the press …[Yet] at a time when most anti-imperialists were wailing over the collapse of the Syrian state and the “hijacking” of a revolution they never supported in the first place, Aziz and his comrades were tirelessly striving for unconditional freedom from all forms of despotism and state hegemony.” …

… The same day, I went out for dinner with a well-connected businessman—he went to school with Bashar al-Assad and Bashar’s elder brother Bassel and has flourished under the regime, even more so since the crisis started. The restaurant served a take on continental food and any type of alcohol you might fancy. A coiffed young woman with a photo of Bashar as her iPhone cover sang songs as her smiling companions knocked back drinks at a price that would pay the rent of a displaced family for a month. At one point, the businessman got up to use the bathroom and something clattered to the floor. It was a pistol. “Oh, that,” he said. “I am so afraid of being kidnapped. I would rather kill myself than have that happen to me.”

During my stay, visits to a half-dozen different central neighborhoods made clear to me that the regime is far from on its last legs—at least here. The economy trundles along, largely propped up by funds from the Iranian government—which has injected at least $4 billion into Syria since the conflict began. …

… Yet the most noticeable change to the city since I lived here before the war is in the urban population itself. Damascus, which had an estimated five to six million inhabitants before the conflict began, never rivaled Cairo for intellectual life, or Beirut for sophistication. Yet it had enough of its own aspiring filmmakers and graying dissidents, worldly youth and wrinkled shop owners, and many highly-educated lawyers, doctors, and scholars. Now many professionals, the young, and even workers with sufficient savings to do so have left for Lebanon, Egypt, the Gulf, or further afield. …

… To these loyalists, the recent course of the war—including the growing reports of more radical groups gaining an upper hand in some opposition regions—has given proof to their argument that the government is the last secular bastion in the region, attacked by a range of extremists funded by Gulf countries. The opposition fighters have done themselves no favors as the fight becomes dirtier. “I wanted a revolution but the regime played a clever game and won,” one young man told me, referring to the how the government stoked fears of sectarian violence, including, according to multiple reports in 2011, by releasing criminals, especially Islamists, from Seydnaya prison so they could join the opposition.

Others in the capital—like most of their compatriots living in rebel-held territory—vehemently disagree. They say they would rather die than live under the regime; and that it must be brought down regardless of the cost. A handful of prominent Damascenes such as Yassin Hajj-Saleh, a well-known writer, and Razan Zeitouneh, a lawyer who has been in hiding since the start of the uprising, have even moved to the rebel-held suburbs. (In mid-July, Hajj-Saleh, who is now in East Ghouta with no power or phone, and very little food, told The Guardian, “In Damascus, we faced the constant possibility of arrest and insufferable torture. Here we are safe from that, but not from a missile that could land on our heads at any minute.”) Nadia, a Syrian friend who works for an international aid agency, told me she likes to cross these lines and go to places such as Homs because the people and the revolution seem far more alive than in Damascus. …

Over the last week, the most reported story from Syria wasn’t the hundreds of people killed by Assad gangs nor was it fighter jets bombing civilian homes in Aleppo. It was an alleged ban on eating croissant by a religious committee in rebel controlled Aleppo.

Sounds ludicrous, doesn’t it? It must be a joke.

Not according to the Time, CNN, Washington Post, Huffington Post and every other news paper in the four corners of the Earth who decided to jump on the bandwagon. …

On August 14th 2013, a video was uploaded to Jihad461′s YouTube account. The video, viewable here (extreme NSFL) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-xYg5qTC7M, showed a rebel of the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (hereafter ISIS) group reading a statement in front of two young men on their knees.

The title of the video uploaded reads, ‘the urgent execution of two Shiite youths by ‘Victory Front’.

In the video, the speaker reads a statement, that roughly, translates as follows. …

Simplistic but entertaining nonetheless, “Shortest Guide to the Middle East Ever”:

Comments (739)

Dawoudsaid:

There are many guilty and crazy parties on all sides of the Lebanese political and sectarian divide. However, one has to be ignorant or deceptive not to realize that the Syrian murderous regime has been the master of bombing innocents. In the last 10 years, Bashar al-Assad and Hasan Nasr of the Shia Lebanese terrorist party have been partners in assassinations: they assassinated Samir Qasir, Rafiq al-Hariri, J. Twaini,……. After Bashar is finally defeated and Hasan is brought before a Syrian court to face justice for his war crimes in al-Qasir and other Syrian towns, violence and assassinations in Lebanon would be reduced by 96%.

Help! What is happening with the selecting of articles for the lead post? This one just goes on and on and exhaustingly on, feeling longer than the full NY Times. There are some very worthwhile gems, but it’s hard work to spot and digest them in the sheer avalanche of stuff.

Please put up posts more often or do some selecting and prioritizing. Most of us have already seen all the mainstream stuff, we rely on SC to go beyond that.

With two weeks left before schools are scheduled to open, Syrian soldiers and pro-government paramilitary forces have moved into school facilities throughout the capital. The move appeared to be part of an effort to shelter military personnel.

Civilian minivans and regular yellow taxis could be seen driving across town with uniformed soldiers as passengers, an unusual sight because troops are usually transported in designated buses. Military equipment and hardware was also being moved around.

Soldiers seen occupying schools in west Damascus seemed to be keeping a low profile. At one school, the hushed conversations of troops could barely be heard from outside the closed gates. One soldier arriving with takeout food for his comrades seemed to look left and right and over his shoulder before he swiftly entered the school through a side gate.

In addition, exhausted soldiers spilled into makeshift camps on sidewalks. The outdoor camps, especially near the city’s ubiquitous checkpoints, have been around for some time, but more may be popping up.

One such camp was next to the abandoned embassies of the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. The camp included a two-tier bunk bed, an outdoor stove and sleeping bags. In the midday heat, one soldier napped in the embassy guard booth, his bare legs sticking out onto the sidewalk. Another soldier sat on his motorcycle leaning on his Kalashnikov rifle and tried to snooze.

Many residents of the Syrian capital are confused and worried, mystified by the seemingly endless talk in the West.

Here is my shorter guide to the middle east:
Arabs did not like their dictators so they revolted and started an Arab spring which was quickly transformed into an Islamist cold winter and made people miss those ” good old days” .
Israel and Iran suddenly looked merciful in the eyes of some after Arab regimes were more brutal than the IDF and the IRG, and now we have a noble peace winner president who wanted to bomb a country before the UN finished its work, the same president campaigned against the bush doctrine which toppled a Sunni dictator who is now seen as a hero by the same people who are on bed with the GCC which paid for that dictator to be removed !!

I may or may not like it, but seeking congressional approval for a strike is a masterful political move by Obama. It gives the US nation several days to debate the issue publicly so that the public is more informed. It gives time of the inspectors to publish their results. It keeps the Syrian regime on their toes waiting.

More importantly, if congress approves it, they will own the attack and they cannot criticize it later. If it does not approve it, it gives Obama, who hates wars, a reason to back down.

I believe that the future of all Arab countries, not just Syria, depends on getting rid of dictatorial regimes AND defeating radical islamists. Only then can these countries accomplish real progress and advancement, not fake ones marked by corrupt economies and sectarian-based national identities.

“The regime might be able to fight the war, but not be able to rebuild the country.”

What makes you so sure? The government has managed this war in surprisingly coherent manner. Of course sanctions, destruction of factories and insecurity have their toll on unimployement and poverty.
Yet, despite that, it is quite possible that the post-war could be well managed by a reformed government. The rich class close to the government got a tough lesson on the bad economical decisions taken since 2006 that they abused. Caught in their frenzy of getting richer, they simply ignored the rapid deterioration of the life in the rural areas and the average citizens. In my opinion that was the main cause of the uprising.

I don’t think that the opposition can do anything better. While the government has proven his cohesion, the opposition has proven its flimsiness and its total incapacity to work outside the dependence of the money of autocratic and capitalistic Arab countries. Their greed, incompetence and inflated ego have been exposed for 3 years with a show of dull and inept leaders. There don’t seem to be much hopes of the emergence of an intelligent leadership out of it.
While some dream that the Arab money will flow on Syria if the present government is replaced by the opposition, others think that this money not only will bring more corruption and abuses but will make Syria a slave of these countries they despise. Syrians have for decades avoided foreign debts just to remain independent.
They also see what how Egypt is paying the price of having become a puppet of the West and the GCC for decades.
Rebuilding the country will be a long task with many pitfalls.
But I believe a reformed government that will get a majority of the Syrian vote in election could manage the rebuilding of the countries without falling prey to the large GCC and Turkey business companies.

If the american congress decides against the strike
There will be permission to use CW in Syria and in other countries, by the regime or by any faction ,this will change the future of terrorism,rather than use explosives ,terrorist will use CW

It is time for Syrians to try and save their country for one last try. The enemies are dictatorship and religion, and saving Syria, or dividing it peacefully without blood, should be the immediate goals.

Let Syrians vote if they want to live together under a modern law equals them all or they want to live under Islam or Kurdistan or Dawlat al-Alawiyyin?

As Hans Blix declared. First it must be proven without any doubt that the toxic gas were chemical weapons. Second the UNSC must come out with a resolution firmly condemning their use, independently of who is responsible. Third the UNSC should order a full investigation by UN experts in arms and balistic (including Russians) to determine the responsibility, then finally come out with another UNSC resolution for actions to punish the culprits/
As the Syrian government has accepted the visit of the UN experts and have given them free hands , there is no reason the SG will not accept that other experts come in to dispell all rumors.

The problem is that takes time. This is why the UN is pushing in parallel the conduction of a cease fire with the Geneva conference.

The main problem today is that the opposition, humiliated again by the refusal of military action will stand on their position to refuse the Geneva conference.
How can they be forced is the real question today.

The article mentions a mother and her two children are struggling to adapt new life in Tartous. They come from Aleppo. Her Jihadi husband sent them to Tartous because he thinks it is safer for them.

I was struck by that men who is fulfilling his Jihad duty in Aleppo. Isn’t he fighting to strip off the way of life and “safety” in Syria which he prefers his wife and kids to be living in.

In the same building, a woman whose two sons are fighting in SAA is having hard time to accept the woman from Aleppo to be her neighbor thinking of her husband is the same man who is using every means to kill her sons and alike.

But Tartous accepts anyone as long as they do not pose trouble or openly insulting SAA or the government.

Not far from Tartous is Qusair which has been known by the world now. Before SAA retook the town, the rebel had occupied the town for over a year.

Qusair used to have a significant number of Christians. All gone or killed by the rebels. Their homes had been ransacked. Churches had been destroyed.

I think that is the reason many Syrians choose the regime over the rebels.

A doctor has criticised Ed Miliband for his role in Parliament rejecting the principle of Britain taking part in a military strike against Syria.

The doctor, from the charity Hand in Hand for Syria, is known as Dr Rola.

She treated victims of a suspected napalm attack on a school in northern Syria earlier this week.

Dr Rola told the BBC’s Newsnight she would invite Mr Miliband and his family to spend time in Syria to experience the horrors suffered by its people.

The UK opposition leader’s office said it had not seen the Newsnight interview but said the Labour leader had made clear that finding a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis should be at the top of the agenda at next week’s G20 summit.
….
Dr Rola said: “I’d like him to spend a day in one of the civilian areas under constant shelling, watching the warplanes above us throw all sorts of weapons on to civilians, and fear for the safety of his family.

“Spend just one day and one night in a tent in one of the camps where the homeless now live and drink sewage water, and try his luck with typhoid fever and no medication.”

“64 percent of the French oppose military action, 58 percent do not trust Hollande to conduct it”,Hollande is facing the dilemma: Either go alone or face the humiliation of having to wait for the USA to decide.

While Hollande does not need the parliament to approve his decision to attack Syria, he is maybe now hoping that the parliament would reject his proposition so he has a “pretext” to back off.

Yet he is under heavy pressure from Saudi Arabia who just gave him a Billion contract of defense and also from the opposition who sees in France as its last hope of changing the balance of military power in Syria.
In my view, if the parliament does not object, Hollande will do it alone. His popularity is very low and he may see this as a chance to boost temporarily as Sarkozy did in Libya. A gamble.

Meanwhile, UMP leader Jean-François Copé has insisted Hollande should wait for the conclusions of UN weapons inspectors in Syria before making any decision.

“If and only if the use of chemical weapons is established, a targeted and limited intervention … should be on the table,” he said Saturday.

Former prime minister and UMP member François Fillon was even more hostile to the possibility of French military action, urging Hollande to act “responsibly” and not follow anyone into an attack “even if they are our friends and allies, the Americans”.

“The region is a powder-keg,” he added.

There is a sense the French right is now seeking to distance itself from intervention in Syria, having earlier supported it, possibly in reaction to polls suggesting military strikes would be deeply unpopular with the French public – something that Hollande may well take into consideration as he mulls his options.

According to a BVA poll released by French daily Le Parisien on Saturday, 64 percent oppose military action, 58 percent do not trust Hollande to conduct it, and 35 percent fear it could “set the entire region (Middle East) ablaze

“In order to establish an Alevi-Sunni convergence, we will bring together a mosque and a cemevi in the same garden in Ankara,” said Doğan at a Belief Leaders Meeting on Aug. 31. “[The Gülen movement] will cover all the expenses; they will construct the mosque, cemevi and also the soup kitchen.”

Are furious and frustrated Saudi Arabia and Qatar seriously hoping that a forced Arab League support for ‘limited strikes’ will influence the US Congress? Poor Bandar, he is out of ammunition against western countries respecting their democratic principles

Insiders say the Arab League will give its nod for US strikes on Syria while cautioning against the excessive use of force; Iraq and Algeria may express reservations

A communiqué that is expected to be issued by the pan-Arab organisation would most likely, according to informed sources, reflect the positions of influential Arab Gulf member states who dominate the 22-member state organisation in the wake of the exclusion of Syria and the marginalisation of Egyptian influence due to internal political turmoil.

“The bottom line is that the Gulf States are supportive of the US strikes; they anticipate it or rather urge it,” said Arab official sources
….
“Saudi Arabia and Qatar, that are usually at odds over most Arab matters, agree — each for its own reasons — that the US strikes should proceed, even without sufficient international support.

Both countries, according to informed Arab and Western diplomats, have tried to use their economic leverage to strengthen the chances of a US-led “limited war” on Al-Assad. These efforts have so far been frustrated by the refusal of key European parliaments to endorse US strikes ahead of the presentation of credible evidence — particularly from a UN investigation team — substantiating allegations that Al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people, as claimed by top US officials.”

Fighters from the al-Qaida-linked al Nusra Front received chemical weapons from Saudi Arabia, according to reports

Former White House adviser Pat Buchanan has added his voice to the growing chorus of critics who say chemical weapons attacks in Syria were carried out by rebel groups, with the possible connivance of the West and its allies in the region.

Buchanan, a broadcaster and political commentator who advised the Republican administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan, echoed former member of Congress Ron Paul in labelling the attacks a “false flag”.

“First, this thing reeks of a false flag operation,” Buchanan said in an interview with Newsmax.

“I would not understand or comprehend that Bashar al-Assad, no matter how bad a man he may be, would be so stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack on civilians in his own country when the immediate consequence… might be that he would be at war with the United States. So this reeks of a false flag operation.”

Earlier in the week, Paul used the same phrase to blame al-Qaida for the use of chemical weapons, saying the attack was part of a plan to draw the US into “strife that’s been going on in that region for thousands of years”.

Paul told Fox Business: “I think one of the reasons why they say, well, this is not regime change is because we’re not really positive who set off the gas. The group that’s most likely to benefit from that is al-Qaida.

“They, you know, ignite some gas, some people die and blame it on Assad. Assad, I don’t think, is an idiot. I don’t think he would do this on purpose in order for the whole world to come down on him.”

Reports have surfaced of al-Qaida-backed rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta apparently admitting they had carried out the chemical attacks.

Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak claimed he had interviewed rebels who said they perpertrated the attacks with weapons supplied by Saudi Arabia.

“More than a dozen rebels interviewed reported that their salaries came from the Saudi government,” said Gavlak.

The rebels claimed the large-scale casualties were caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons, which were intended for the al-Qaida-linked splinter group the al-Nusra Front.

‘Saudi factory’

The claims would appear to support comments by Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Faisal Mekdad, who blamed “terrorists” for the use of chemical weapons. Others have claimed that the alleged chemical weapons bore markings from a “Saudi factory”.

Gavlak said rebels told him they had received no advice on how to handle the weapons, or what they contained.

“We were very curious about these arms. And unfortunately, some of the fighters handled the weapons improperly and set off the explosions,” one militant identified as “J” is alleged to have told Gavlak.

The account was supported by another female fighter, “K”, who told Gavlak: “They didn’t tell us what these arms were or how to use them. We didn’t know they were chemical weapons. We never imagined they were chemical weapons.”

According to Gavlak, Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of an opposition rebel, said: “My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry.”

The weapons were described as having a “tube-like structure”, while others were like a “huge gas bottle”.

Gavlak has been an AP correspondent in the Middle East for two decades, and has also worked for National Public Radio and the BBC.

The AP distanced itself from Gavlak’s report, saying it had not published the article itself.

Saudi Arabia’s role in arming the rebels is well documented. Earlier this week, reports emerged that Prince Bandar bin Sultan had attempted to cajole Russia into dropping its support for Syria through a mixture of diplomatic inducements and coded threats.

The prince was said to have secretly offered Russia a deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russian gas contracts, if the Kremlin backed away from the Assad regime in Syria.

Bandar also hinted at Chechen terror attacks on next year’s Winter Olympics in Sochi unless Putin abandoned support for the Syrian President, saying: “The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us.”

• US secretary of state John Kerry defended the president’s decision to seek Congressional approval for military action in Syria. He said doing so made the mission stronger. He said there “are good people in Congress” and the administration “does not contemplate” that those good people will vote “no” on an authorization to use force.

• But the president “has the right” to strike even without congressional approval, Kerry said.

• Kerry claimed the US government had collected even more evidence to add to their “undeniable” case that Assad used chemical weapons east of Damascus on 21 August. Washington has obtained hair and blood samples that “have tested positive for signatures of sarin,” Kerry said.
….
One question: will the search for that common ground enlarge the war plan the Obama administration was considering without congressional input? Kerry has just described a military outing thus:

Not just an isolated pinprick, but something that can have a profound impact on Assad’s ability to use these weapons.
….
The Guardian

Hopeful it wasn’t a masterful move by Obama. It was a humiliation and a defeat. Like with his spying scandal, Obama had no intention to have a public debate on his criminal war on Syria. He wanted to attack. He was backed down.

“I think the failure of the Obama administration has been we haven’t engaged the Russians enough or the Chinese enough on this,” he told David Gregory on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“The Russians have every reason to want to keep their influence in Syria, and I think the only way they do is if there’s a change in government where Assad is gone” but other current members remain, Paul said. “That would also be good for the Christians.” He noted earlier that Assad has protected Christians “for decades.”

The Republican senator went on to say that a failure to do so could result in an Islamic state that could persecute Christians in the country.

Rand Paul admitted that the senate will endorse Obama decision.He further said the decision in the house is 50-50
The case for strike will only grow in the next week as the evidence of Sarin use has been documented

the discussion in the congress will re enforce the idea that Assad may use CW again so a more support for ousting Assad will certainly prevail

I am very optimistic that Obama will prevail,and Assad will go to the corner

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources authorized the release of the following three heads up.

1) the much publicized Russian deal to supply Obscene Head with so-called advanced SS anti aircraft missiles has been scrapped. The military industrial Commission of the Russian Federation exercised tremendous pressure upon the Kremlin for scrapping the deal, which includes a dozen planes in addition to the missiles. The commision fears that it will suffer a non-repairable humiliation if its much-hyped missile system were to be turned into dust by Operation Obscene Skies which the Federation believes is now being redesigned to have much greater bite than initially planned. Nail biting is reported to have reached a frenzied level among the Kremlin chiefs over their rejection of a once-in-a-life-time deal offer made by the shrewed Saudi National Security Chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. It was revealed that the Prince’s offer was made to Putin in a take-it-or-leave-it-not-valid-after-I-walk-out tone. Several calls by the Kremlin to the Prince went unanswered since the current crisis erupted.

2) Hashemi Rafsanji, of Iran, made news today by directly accusing Obscene Head of gasing the syrian people recently. Rafsanjani is also unhappy about military units within the mullocracy who are actively involved in political maneuvering and imposing policy. Our well informed sources would also like to advise those among you here to refrain from the use of the term Persia when referring to the Iranian entity in whichever form it exists today. Our sources would like to remind you that the Persian entity no longer exists after it was destroyed forever in the seventh century.

3) the FBI has increased surveillance of Syrians living in the US. The primary targets are regime supporters who are believed to be involved in cyberterrorism. This particular site, Syriacomment, is under constant surveillance by specialized unit within FBI. Microsoft is providing tools to reveal to the surveillance unit personal information, including addresses, of any suspects. The owner of the site and his helpers are also prime suspects but for reasons other than cyberterrorism.

Everyone knows that a chemical agent was used in the Ghuta and many suspected SARIN. The only question remains unanswered is who was responsible for this criminal act? The regime or the rebels! Actually it is your obligation to find out who did it and why and then present your findings / proof (Sorry, not a collection of 100 videos on YouTube or the internet) to the Americans people and to the world.. Where were you when 3 million people were slaughtered in Rwanda and Saddam gassed and killed one million Iranians? Drama is not a cause for a war. The TOXIC Muslim world of the ME can’t handle one more war! It will explode.

i’ve reconsidered. people arguing either go big or don’t go in at all. that’s crazy. even a little bit of help is better than no help at all. and look at how much the regime has fractured just from rumors of a potential strike.

a limited strike might be all that is needed to topple the regime.

assad wont be able to launch a retaliatory assault if most of his forces have run away. plus, how will he be able to do so if allied forces have taken out his planes & runways?

just how many soldiers does the regime have left? was assad forced to launch a chemical attack, a desperate tactic of last resort, because the regime is short of manpower??

(HEADS-UP said:the FBI has increased surveillance of Syrians living in the US. The primary targets are regime supporters who are believed to be involved in cyberterrorism. This particular site, Syriacomment, is under constant surveillance by specialized unit within FBI. Microsoft is providing tools to reveal to the surveillance unit personal information, including addresses, of any suspects. The owner of the site and his helpers are also prime suspects but for reasons other than cyberterrorism)
———————-
HEADS-UP , GROW-UP! Stop making a fool of yourself. We saw many of your kind here on SC threatening others with this kind of statement. Also, you remind me of other well-known posters where the the count of the thump up and down is more important than anything else! No substance!

– she imports western food so her children so she doesn’t have to rely on Syrian food

– her UK-based parents now hang out in Beirut so they can keep in touch with the Assad family

– she now travels with at least three Republican bodyguards whenever she goes out

– she doesn’t see any Western news, or surf the internet, in case she finds coverage of the Syrian crisis ‘depressing’

– she still sees herself as in a respectable role, and is obsessed with her appearance

– she is convinced her family will rule Syria for years to come. And she is particularly interested in growing the family wealth and making sure they keep it

– she wants to be certain her son, Hafez, will take over as president one day, even if this means hiding him in a school or college in Switzerland or Britain for a time

– a journalist who spent days with her never saw her eat (The latest photos show her looking more anorexia-like than ever with stick-like arms and her head looking heavy on her thin neck – if she wore a bikini you would see her ribs sticking out)

Thanks to the president’s arrogance, incompetence and sheer savagery, the situation in Syria is desperate and makes the risks of taking action worthwhile in the final calculus

EXCERPT:

Hafez Al Assad’s life’s work was to concoct a Syria in which the choice lay between his family’s despotism or the chaos of civil war. To that end, Al Assad and his cohort of sadists worked compulsively.

Sectarianism as an ordering principle of society was never absent from Syria’s modern politics, it was the main framework through which the family tightened its grip over Syria. However, and it is important to note, the Al Assads went above and beyond and utilised every possible cleavage within Syrian society to consolidate their power.

Hafez Al Assad never sought any kind of identifiable Syrian nationalism. Instead, a patchwork of ‘classism’, regionalism, sectarianism, and tribalism was held together by the regime through the breeding of mutual, inter-communal resentment and state-sponsored terrorism.

True to Assadist form, Bashar Al Assad relegated these cleavages when it served his interest and deployed every tool at his disposal to explode them when needed for his retention of power.

The monster is out now, and no amount of wishing-away that simple truth could deny its catastrophic potency. But it should not preclude action, it should not reward the Al Assads for their cruelty and cynicism.

SyriaLover or better yet SyriaHater – So you are telling us that the FBI is going to love you because you are a boot-kisser and traitor – An MP or MP sympathizer who asks the world to bomb his country of origin so he can be appointed an Amir.
Actually you are an American-hater who wants Americans to get involve, die and suffer to advance your hidden addenda of hate and revenge against all other religions. You, Heads ups, Tera, MK, SH and others should be prosecuted for treason and forgery

post 55 To SyriaHater, We all know your interest You are advocating for a Tsunami of Ethnic Cleansing that can easily spread beyond Syria’s borders. Tens of millions will be killed or slaughtered – More than Holocaust and the Armenian genocide combined!

SyriaHater & Majed: offer your own lives for the war – not Syrian and American lives. The two of you are the biggest cowards on SC. You want to fight in this war go to Turkey and contact your bootlicker associates and go to the front. I hear Homs needs help.

The degraded situation of the Syrian military after two and a half years of war may mean it is more vulnerable to limited US missile strikes than some western officials have been suggesting.

While there has been widespread scepticism from military sources over the effect of the suggested air strikes, former Syrian military officers and some analysts believe even limited strikes might cause significant damage.

[…]

While the Syrian air force has been described as being on “its last legs”, with crews cannibalising aircraft to keep planes in the air, other factors are likely to be problematic for the regime.

“They have been moving people out of security compounds,” the defector said, repeating the claim made by others that prisoners and civilians had been moved into the vacated bases.

“But there are other locations that they can’t evacuate. They rely on holding the big bases like Mezze. They can’t abandon them.

“They will have to keep their forces manning the main supply routes and that makes them vulnerable to attack.

“I served at Mezze. The bunkers for personnel are not very good. We used to nickname them the graves and talk about how – in a crisis – we’d rather take our chances in the open than get buried in them.”

He said he did not believe that the shelters available for hiding aircraft were well enough hardened to sustain a hit from a cruise missile. “There are no underground bunkers. The hangars we have in the open are reinforced but no match for modern weapons.”

[…]

“There is a buried cable system connecting all the large bases, and a new North Korean communication system that was installed last year, designed to jump from band to band if one is compromised. But a lot of the systems for communication with aircraft are based on old-fashioned radio handsets.”

He said that in some locations his network of defectors had calculated that strikes on as few as three locations – as in the case of Deraa – would allow opposition fighters to move in.

“We have supplied the locations of what we think are the key targets. The [Free Syrian Army] is ready if they are taken out.

“In addition the aircraft that the regime does have available are old. Many of the newest operating are from the 1990s. There are places where there should be six jets operating but they can only fly two. Our sources tell us they have only 60 pilots available and 40 helicopter crews. But because the opposition doesn’t have aircraft that is still a big advantage. Any damage to these aircraft would cause severe damage to the regime’s capability.

“The other advantage that they have is long-range weapons. They have Scuds and another missile with a shorter range.”

Our comfortably North American Assadist cheerleaders may continue their stale old routines of denial, distortion, obfuscation and bluff — but what is their grasp of the actual state of the Syrian Air Force? What can the cheerleaders do besides expectorate: “Assad Assad, rah rah rah, Bashar Bashar, siss boom bah”?

In other news, according to an Israeli news source that monitors Syrian Arabic media, the Syrian side has laid out its targets in Israel should the US attack by sea and air:

Syrian state media on Saturday published a list of “legitimate” targets to be attacked in Israel should America and other Western powers launch air strikes against the regime of Bashar Assad.

Among the targets Syria threatened to hit are Israel’s nuclear reactor in the Negev town of Dimona, various air force bases and the petrochemical plant in the densely populated port city of Haifa.

In the shadow of such a threat, and with Syria have proved its willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against even its own people, there is much speculation that Israel will be heavily involved in the Syria strike debate scheduled for when Congress reconvenes in Washington next week.

The F.B.I. has increased its surveillance of Syrians inside the United States in response to concerns that a military strike against the government of President Bashar al-Assad could lead to terrorist attacks here or against American allies and interests abroad, according to current and former senior United States officials.

[…]

Senior national security officials at F.B.I. headquarters in Washington have told the bureau’s field offices in recent days to follow up with sources who have ties to Syrians in an attempt to find talk or evidence of a retaliatory strike, the officials said. And Syrians implicated in continuing investigations will be put under even closer scrutiny, the officials said.

The Department of Homeland Security and the F.B.I. have also sent out a classified bulletin alerting federal, state and local law enforcement officials of potential threats created by the Syria conflict, the officials said. A senior F.B.I. official declined to comment.

F.B.I. agents are expected to interview hundreds of Syrians in the coming days.

I do think that the regimist mudwallow here at SC will be exempt from FBI attention. In any case, the tired cheerleaders are unlikely to be US citizens …

“The F.B.I. has increased its surveillance of Syrians inside the United States in response to concerns that a military strike against the government of President Bashar al-Assad could lead to terrorist attacks here or against American allies and interests abroad, according to current and former senior United States officials.”

Please tune down your anti-American rhetorics on SC and your call for the use of poisonous gas against Syrian civilians you call terrorists.

“I think it’s at least 50/50 whether the House will vote down involvement in the Syrian war,” Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

“I think the Senate will rubber stamp what [Obama] wants but I think the House will be a much closer vote,” he added. “And there are a lot of questions we have to ask.”

Paul, a staunch defender of civil liberties who has battled against members of his own party over the government’s use of drones and NSA data collection programs, said he believes it’s a “mistake” to get involved in a civil war in Syria that could escalate “out of control.”

Other influential GOP leaders also indicated Sunday that Obama may lose the vote.

““I think it is going to be difficult to get the vote through in Congress, especially when there’s going to be time over the next nine days for opposition to build up to it,” said New York Rep. Peter King on Fox News Sunday. King, who sharply criticized Obama on Friday for “abdicating his responsibility as commander-in-chief” for seeking congressional authorization, said Congress would “probably” reject authorization if the vote was held today.

Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, also said he does not believe Congress will authorize the strike.

Shortly after Kerry’s appearance on the program, Paul shot back at Kerry, a decorated war veteran who became an outspoken critic of Vietnam War after serving in that conflict.

“I see a young John Kerry who went to war, and I wish he remembered more of how awful war is and that it shouldn’t be a desired outcome,” Paul said.

“My heart is deeply wounded by what is happening in Syria and anguished by the dramatic developments” on the horizon, Francis said, in an apparent reference to the U.S. and France considering a military strike to punish the Syrian regime for a chemical weapons attack.

Francis reiterated previous appeals for all sides in the civil war to put down their arms and “listen to the voice of their conscience and with courage take up the way of negotiations.”

Usually soft-spoken, Francis raised his voice as he declared, “War brings on war! Violence brings on violence.”

His admonishment against resorting to arms as a solution recalled the repeated emotional implorations a decade ago by the late Pope John Paul II in a vain attempt to persuade the U.S. administration then led by President George W. Bush not to invade Iraq.

The deteriorating drama of Syria inspired Francis to set aside Sept. 7 as a day of fasting and prayer for Syria.

Francis invited Catholics, other Christians, those of other faiths and non-believers who are “men of good will” to join him that evening in St. Peter’s Square to invoke the “gift” of peace for Syria, the rest of the Middle East and worldwide where there is conflict.

“The world needs to see gestures of peace and hear words of hope and of peace,” Francis said.

Elliot Higgins’ Brown Moses blog post today is essential reading (even if only for the bewildered Assadist commentary that follows). The experts consulted by Higgins all found the various claims of Saudi/Joo chemotherapy to be alternately stupid, baseless, laughable, ignorant or inane. The Dale Gavlak reportage is found wanting.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon is the Former Commander of UK CBRN Forces and COO of SecureBio.

I’m sure the Saudis would not do this without any training or support, protective equipment etc – I can’t in my wildest dreams believe they would do it anyway – they are still very close to US, who [US] even in the ‘Blackest ‘of operations are very very unlikely to go this far.

[…]

Al Nousra allegedly had some Sarin in Turkey in April 13 (I think) but it turned out to be anti-freeze.

Gwyn Winfield works for specialist magazine CBRNe World.

The contention is a Saudi Prince decided to topple Assad, got(made?) chemical agent from Saudi (somewhere else?), and then shipped it to the Ghouta front, stored it in tunnels, where it was damaged by the barrage and the agent released.

The big question is why? Why did he ship pressurised containers? Why did he transport them to an area where they might get damaged?

If they aren’t in munitions then the odds are that there is going to be an old fashioned line dispersal – where you wait for the wind to blow it towards the enemy. This is the worst of all chemical releases, the wind frequently changes direction and blows the agent back into friendly forces – which is sub optimal! If he was going to decant it into a different delivery system why ship it to the front lines?

Where is this agent supposed to have come from? Why risk escalating the conflict, especially when Assad has more agent and better protection and training?

[…]

Steve Johnson is Lead for Explosive and Hazardous Forensics at Cranfield university

Hmm. There’s a lot to follow up. Key though is that Saudi have never been seen as a possessor of chemical wapons so where would they get it? It wraps the plausible (Saudi support for opposition and wrangling with Russia) around the slightly harder to gauge (chemical weapons provided by ….)

How plausible is the tunnel accident scenario? It depends but certainly less simple than the rocket scenario.

Dan Kaszeta, a US Army Chemical Corps veteran, provides some very detailed answers on sarin.

1. Article is very thin on facts. It’s assertions and a few quotes.

2. Assad’s forces far more trained and equipped for CW defence.

3. Saudis are many things, but they are also very politically astute. Can’t envisage a scenario where they’d want to get caught out with CW.

4. Flies in the face of the material evidence you’ve been painstakingly collating.

5. We’ve seen no actual footage or other indicators of rebel CW use.

6. All my various concerns about the need for whoever did the attack to operate in a manner so as not to kill their own troops… Rebels are far poorer equipped to not kill themselves playing around with chemical munitions.

7. Where, according to this theory, did the Saudis get the stuff? Does this imply that SA has a CW program under everyone’s noses and that the Saudi military, which is lousy with foreign advisors and contractors has CW without word leaking out?

In the comments following, those committed to Assad make a very basic cognitive error and fallacy: the argument from ignorance. The features of this mental cul-de-sac include the hallmarks:

Rah rah Assad: “I don’t understand why the regime would use chemotherapy on its own people … ergo, the Saudis did it. Or it’s fake. Or the Joo.“

“Please tune down your anti-American rhetorics on SC and your call for the use of poisonous gas against Syrian civilians you call terrorists.”

Let’s go again: I asked President Assad to give 24 hour notice in any areas the rebels are in for civilians to leave. Following that I asked our president to start bombing and not stop until 1.) surrender 2.) the enemy is annihilated.

This would have saved lives. So far, our heroes in the SAA have been restrained on the enemy – to prevent collateral damage. I would imagine during an attack by Obama they will be less restrained. It will be a fight to the death to protect the homeland.

Of course, the terrorists are using civilians as human shields so my plan is impossible.

Chemical weapons would be totally useless in a war. We can kill far more of the enemy with standard munitions. Using them on Israel is another thing but that is up to the President and the SAA High Command.

As far as you go: get in a plane and go to Turkey and fight. It isn’t “Tara promises to fight to the end with US and Syrian lives.” Tara needs to put her life on the line. No one should die for something you believe in.

I think Kerry just cost his job. His boss will not fire him. But he just needs to resign “voluntarily”

Kerry has spent all his political capital and influence on Syria crisis. He clearly warns Congress for taking notes this is about Israel.

But is Israel really ready to put its weight on the Congress this time?

When some Israeli intellectuals trying to make a comparison of Obama’s late decision last night to the event in Munich in 1938, you will get the mindset of those Zionists: US has to work for us unconditionally.

Of course Israel wants to take out Assad and the regime because Iran would follow to be the next and it is the ultimate goal. For Israel, the priority is Iran, not Syria.

Kerry has taken personal on Assad and he suggests that the military objective is not going to be punishment. It is about changing the dynamic. Kerry has reset the priority as Syria.

The regime has to make it clear to Israel. That will only lead to an attack to Israel by Syria. If the regime is cornered, all bets are off for no response from the regime. Is Israel willing to get a war even though they will definitely in victorious position by supporting a punitive military strike against the regime?

I sincerely doubt Israel will press Congress to vote yes if the message from the regime is clear enough. Israel is crazy but not that crazy.

The biggest pressure on Congress to vote no will be from American people. Tea party congressmen and women have no appetite for war. There is enough time for a healthy debate in Congress and anti-war movement to work against the strike. John Kerry does not enjoy good reputation or relation in Congress. He probably can press the senate to get it pass but it is Congress to make the call this time.

The impact of the horrible CW attack is already fading on people’s mind. Still UN has not implicated the regime and Assad are behind the attack.

There is a unfortunate detachment from majority of Americans to their current government and the way their government to prioritize this kind of international involvement over national affairs. Even to those people who are disgusted by the attack, military action by US only gets negative reaction. Public opinion will influence the vote and the vote from Congress will reflect the public opinion encouraged by the result from UK Parliament.

Many Americans will be glad to see Syria crisis can help them to get rid of Kerry. Me too.

first we discover asma once pleaded for foreign intervention, now this:

As he [obama] charts his course, he might consider a thought from an unlikely source. In a 2009 British newspaper interview that struck a moderate tone, Assad said he hoped Obama would take an active role in the Middle East peace process because only Washington could broker a lasting solution. He said, “There is no substitute for the United States.”

troll, a member of the elite la-roach gang tries to upstage hardly-a-massacre, zouzou and the rest of the dog-poop chemical athad … while they look and sound pretentious and ugly, it looks and sounds stupid and ugly. These are big-league nus-lira/aounite/dog-poop operatives, troll is little league marginal la-roach…pathetic.

Wow. If you felt this forum is being frenziedly spammed you are right!

I just got a nerd teenager to do an exercise looking at the source of the last 100 comments.

Results:

REVENIRE: 26%
REVENIRE’S COLLEAGUES: 56%
OTHERS: 18%

Team Assad has become frantic since the world got on Assad’s case over the CW strike – distracting, dumping, threatening, rambling and raving until they have filled 82% of this forum!!

Last time I checked it was around the 30% mark, but REVENIRE alone is now fulfilling that quota.

Obviously the handlers have put pressure on them to more than double their number of posts.

REVENIRE must be a tired boy. Sometimes he goes until nearly 2 am, and he can fire up before 6 am. He’s likely on some sort of chemical fuel to keep the pace up, which would explain why his posts have that crazed tone.

Former president and fourteen Islamist leaders accused of inciting violence in December clashes head to criminal court
…
According to investigators, Morsi and his presidential staff have been accused of ordering their supporters to attack peaceful protesters who assembled outside the palace to denounce the former president’s decree. The move reportedly came after the republican guards and ministry of interior refused to obey orders to attack protesters.

Morsi has been accused of inciting his supporters and aides to kill and use violence against peaceful protesters.

Ghoneim, El-Erian and El-Beltagy have been accused of inciting violence against protesters via media outlets.

A date for the immediate trial of the defendants will be announced shortly.

Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people.

I believe it is hard for the Assad Rah Rah team to publicly announce that they believe elements of the regime actually attempted chemotherapy on Damascus outskirts, yet I also think Team Assad knows in its bitter little hearts that the news is true.

That said, the elements who support every Assad escalation of war — from sniping to artillery to mortars to cluster bombs to air-burst fuel bombs (‘napalm’) to chemical ‘cleansing’ — these elements cannot stand down from previous statements. They cannot criticize any action of the SAA, no matter how brutal, senseless or sickening. (I do not include Apple, who favours the regime but does not ally with the denialists)

It’s therefore no surprise that exactly the same happened now with the massacre in Ghouta, as after initially denying it and in fact still denying the entire thing (Meqdad) the opposition was quickly blamed for committing it. The propaganda machine became overheated again, pumping one of after the other fabricated fact and conspiracy delusion into the air and onto the net. Videos were dissected to show that the opposition murdered all those people, calling “false flag”, rehashing old claims about previous chemical attacks, even claiming that these were Shi`a areas or that the bodies of the victims were actually kidnapped Alawites from Latakia. The latter would rather imply that it was a hoax and so the schizophrenic “nothing happened but the terrorists did it”-line continues.

Adding insult to injury, Assad fanatics have openly called for the use of chemical weapons and celebrated when they got what they were after. That’s what is often overlooked: those who incite, call for and celebrate genocide and mass destruction [chemical, biological or otherwise], the “Assad or we will burn the country” maniacs, and those who initiated the trendy delusions of hoaxes and false flags are one and the same: the worshipers of Assad.

Beyond moral justification and military capability, their responses have completely given them away:

1) They deny anything happened while at the same time affirming it took place and blaming others for it.
2) Their threats of chemical massacres have become a reality.
3) Nobody was reprimanded for these threats and celebrations.
4) No compassion towards the victims.
5) No attempt was made at helping nor allowing others to help.
6) They kept the UN away for at least 5 days.
7) They continued to bombard the affected areas.
8) They made no attempt at protecting their own areas from such attacks in the future.

Number eight is the clincher, and unanswerable from the Rah Rahs: why has the regime shown zero concern or preparation for another round of chemotherapy, be it from Mars/Joos/Saudis or not?

Nothing in the way of civilian preparation for another ‘false flag’ chemical attack. No safety tips. No intelligence assessments of the likely sites to be targeted by the ghost/Joo/Sawdee/Martians.** No gas mask distributions. No drills, no information.

Nothing.

This is not the behaviour of a regime that believes its own cover story.

That being what it is, perhaps the cheerleaders can tell us why the Syrian trumpets have listed likely Israeli attack sites, as noted above?

Distorsion of Iranian declaration is a speciality of the Western countries. That’s what Rasfandjani actually said:

Iran”s Rafsanjani says syrian people “attacked by chemical weapons”
02/09/2013
TEHRAN, Sept 1 (KUNA) — Chairman of Iran’s Expediency Council Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said the Syrian people “have been attacked by chemical weapons” and were now awaiting for a foreign assault.
“The Syrian people have been subjected to a chemical attack and now have to wait for the foreign attack,” Rafsanjani was quoted by the Iranian Labor news agency as saying during a visit to northern Iran.

DUBAI (REUTERS) – Former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said the Syrian government, a strong ally of Teheran, carried out a chemical weapons attack against its own people, the semi-official Iranian Labour News Agency (ILNA) reported on Sunday.
…
“The people have been the target of a chemical attack by their own government, and now they must also wait for an attack by foreigners,” Mr Rafsanjani said, according to ILNA.

“Right now, America, the Western world, along with some of the Arab countries, are nearly issuing a clarion call for war in Syria. May God have mercy on the people of Syria,” he said.

“The people of Syria have seen much damage in these two years. The prisons are overflowing, and they’ve converted stadiums into prisons. More than 100,000 people killed and millions displaced show the plight of Syria more than ever before,” he added.

Tara is on Hate Auto-Pilot and doesn’t bother to read posts. Iranian story already proven false. She will get depressed now. Yesterday she was so out of it she wanted the ENTIRE Syria Comment site closed to please her mood.

Reuters/Reuters – EDITORS’ NOTE: Reuters and other foreign media are subject to Iranian restrictions on leaving the office to report, film or take pictures in Tehran. REUTERS/Stringer
DUBAI (Reuters) – An Iranian news agency quoted former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani as saying Syria’s government had attacked its own people with chemical weapons, but later replaced the report with a different version that did not attribute blame for the raid.

The second version by the semi-official Iranian Labour News Agency reported him as saying on Sunday: “On the one hand the people of Syria are the target of a chemical attack, and now they must wait for an attack by foreigners.”

In the earlier version, the quote was: “The people have been the target of a chemical attack by their own government and now they must also wait for an attack by foreigners.”

The earlier version of his remarks differed sharply from comments by other Iranian officials, who have said rebels trying to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad were responsible for a poison gas attack on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21.
…
In other remarks which were unchanged, Rafsanjani went on: “Right now America, the Western world along with some of the Arab countries are nearly issuing a clarion call for war in Syria – may God have mercy on the people of Syria,” he said.

“The people of Syria have seen much damage in these two years, the prisons are overflowing and they’ve converted stadiums into prisons, more than 100,000 people killed and millions displaced,” he added.
…

As-Safir: What is Russia’s political assessment about the poison gas massacre in east and west Ghouta? Is it true that Russia has failed to control the use of this weapon?

Zasypkin: It’s not the first time that they’ve used the pretext of weapons of mass destruction to go on military adventures, as happened in Iraq. And according to our information, those who used chemical weapons in Syria are the armed opposition, not the Syrian regime. We have handed over the complete file about the Khan al-Asal incident to the UN Security Council. We must await the results of the experts’ investigations and the discussions in the Security Council.

— the US put up its unclassified intelligence assessment; Russia’s “information” is however under embargo.

According to a Hezbollah source speaking with Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity, it was assumed that, according to the plan, the regime would continue its cooperation with Hezbollah to gain control of the outskirts of Damascus, via a battle in eastern and western Ghouta, as well as through beginning another battle in the Qalamoun region. The latter is adjacent to the Lebanese border facing the western Bekaa valley, and is characterized by rugged terrain. It was also assumed that these two battles would be followed by a battle for Aleppo, which is seen as a battle that would, to a large extent, decide the overall internal Syrian conflict. However, this plan, by which the Syrian army — along with strong operational military support from Hezbollah — would take the reins of the military battle, stopped the day after the US declared that it was prepared for a military strike against the regime against the backdrop of Western accusations that it had used chemical weapons in the Damascus countryside.

In light of the current circumstances, Hezbollah is in a very complicated position. On the one hand, it is facing an internal attack from numerous Lebanese political forces that accuse the party of being responsible for dragging the security repercussions of the Syrian crisis into the Lebanese interior. On the other hand, it faces an intense regional political and media attack from the Arab Gulf States, which accuse it of working for Iran, against the interests of the Lebanese people and against the will of the Syrian people wishing to overthrow the Assad regime.

From another, fundamental angle, Hezbollah is finding that it may now be forced to fight on two fronts at the same time: against a broad military coalition of NATO countries — led by the US — and against Israel. The arena for such a conflict would stretch from Syria to Lebanon, from the Syrian-Turkish border all the way to Lebanon’s border with Israel.

This means that the party must spread its forces — which comprise more than a hundred thousand fighters supported by missile systems, including ground-to-ground missiles, ground-to-sea missiles and perhaps ground-to-air missiles, using the type that are carried on one’s shoulders — throughout this entire area that could ignite following an expected Western strike on Syria.

In an interview with the “PBS Newshour” on Aug. 28, Obama said that he is willing to work with “anybody” to resolve the Syria conflict.

“Although I have called for Assad to leave and make sure that we got a transitional government that could be inclusive in Syria, what I’ve also concluded is that direct military engagement, involvement in the civil war in Syria, would not help the situation on the ground,” Obama said, adding, “We’re prepared to work with anybody — the Russians and others — to try to bring the parties together to resolve the conflict.”

“Anybody” just might mean Iran, which holds more influence in Syria than any other country. Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Mohammad Khazaee, welcomed the idea of the Geneva II conference on Syria in an interview with Al-Monitor on May 24.

A US-Iran diplomatic channel would be more decisive in ending the war and preventing further massacres than a limited bombing campaign against select military targets.

The president’s remarks about dealing with “anybody” came one day after UN Undersecretary General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, a former US assistant secretary of state for near eastern affairs, discussed chemical weapons and Iran’s role in a political solution in Syria with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in Tehran, as reported for Al-Monitor by Ali Hashem.

You will need to try much harder to get an emotional response from me.

By now, I know how you operate with people quite well. I have watched you act like you’re the Queen of Syria Comment for years. I think it is high time you lost your crown and we get a new queen. Since Asma would not consider a royal title – she’s too classy – I nominate Bill Scherk, SyriaHater or Capt. Omen.

Why do failed presidential candidates end up by becoming secretary of States and resemble Muppet characters?.
Yet while muppet characters meet success, the failed presidential candidates become failed secretary of States.

The American people do not want the United States to go to war in Syria. There are no American interests being threatened in Syria. Syria has not attacked the United States, nor American citizens, nor has Syria attacked United States armed forces personnel. There has been no Congressional declaration of war. There has been no United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force in Syria. To go to war in Syria at this time would be illegal and unconstitutional. To go to war in Syria at this time would be criminal under international law, the crime of aggression. The President of the United States is not authorized under law to declare war on his own. If the President will decide to go to war without a declaration of war from Congress, that would be an impeachable offense.

At the end of a nerve-racking day in the cross hairs of American gunships, Syrians gathered around televisions to watch President Obama announce the start of an expected American missile strike.

When he instead declared that he would seek Congressional approval for the strikes — telling them, essentially, never mind, for now — Syrians were shocked. Also relieved, bewildered, confused, triumphant and angry.

“I think there is a lot of fear among people,” added Mohammed, who gave only his first name for safety reasons. “They are trying to hide it, but they are afraid.”

[…]

Abeer Basal, a Damascus resident, had waited with clenched anxiety since word of an American strike began to circulate, along with reports that the government was moving political prisoners to military bases or leaving them in security offices that could be targets. Her brother was arrested eight months ago, and her family feared he could be killed, one of the many potential unintended consequences of a strike.

“While Obama was speaking,” she said, “my mother didn’t stop crying and praying that they decide against the military involvement in Syria.”

Many Syrians feel deeply ambivalent about a strike, hoping it curbs the government’s indiscriminate use of force — by punishing Mr. Assad for deadly chemical attacks on Aug. 21 that American officials blame on his government — but also fearing it could unleash new chaos.

Khalid al-Shami, a humanitarian aid worker in Damascus, summed up the quandary.

“I am against the military intervention in Syria if it will turn the country into the new Iraq,” he said. “I stand for it if it will in any way help to save souls.”

He said Mr. Obama appeared to be trying to keep the promise on which he was elected, to avoid repeating the mistakes of the American invasion of Iraq by limiting the scope of the strike and seeking consensus. It made sense, he said, that Mr. Obama would conceal the “zero hour” of the strike, and that he would take care to ensure it did not “contradict his electoral program about keeping the U.S. away from further wars.”

[…]

Syria’s state broadcast channels synchronized their programming, continuing the solemn wartime programming that had played all day. They had canceled movies and dramas, mixing triumphal montages of cheering crowds and military exercises with more sedate fare. A report about the government’s plans to offer free feed to herders suffering from the war’s economic effects lingered over images of fat sheep grazing in dusty fields.

As an aside, and for what it’s worth, I appreciate ZOO’s repeated mentions of the Geneva II framework. It is indeed the only possible route to a negotiated peace, and away from continued armed rampages and mutual destruction. The process is dormant at the moment, but having (at the time) achieved a rare consensus (from regime and rebel sides) … it remains ‘the only peaceful game in town.’

I hope over the next awful weeks in Syria that the process can be revisited here in comments, in detail, frankly and honestly. The sausage-grinding and cheerleading will continue, of course.

Let the Americans on their death ships wonder when they will be hit with a missile attack. Let the Israelis huddle with their gas masks on wondering when Syrian, Hezbollah and Iranian missiles will burn the Zionist entity.

And, this is the most important one, let the enemy inside Syria meet their death at the hands our heroic Syrian Arab Army.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar have failed to convince the Arab countries to allow an attack on Syria lead by the USA without a UNSC resolution.

Bandar Bin Sultan must be furious as he needed a clear support of the Arab League for the US strikes to put pressure on the Congress. He failed.
The Arab League poor countries supported economically by rich Qatar and Saudi Arabia did not dare antagonize the two oil rich hyenas, so they went along with the accusations but refused the USA intervention. Well done.

A strong rebuff to the two oily hyenas..
“Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Tunisia and Algeria voiced opposition to foreign military intervention”

Before the AL meeting, there was high hopes that the Arab League would approve the US strikes as it would boost Obama’s position facing the Congress.
Well the Arab countries dare to say NOT WITHOUT THE UN.

That was the heading before the meeting

“Arab League approval for US strikes on Syria likely to precede Congress decision”

Efforts by Saudi Arabia and Syrian opposition leaders to convince the organisation to back a US military strike failed. Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Tunisia and Algeria voiced opposition to foreign military intervention.”

After the Arab League, now the highest Sunni authority, Al Azhar, gives a huge NO to the planned US strikes on Syria.
Bandar Bin Sultan is increasingly jeopardized and the opposition falling into a deep depression

CAIRO: Al Azhar in Cairo, Sunni Islam’s highest authority, yesterday declared its firm opposition to any US strikes on Syria, saying this would amount to “an aggression against the Arab and Islamic nation”.

The institution in a statement “expressed its categorical rejection and condemnation of the decision by the American President (Barack Obama) to launch military strikes on Syria,” to punish president Bashar Al Assad’s regime for an alleged chemical weapons attack near Damascus last month that left hundreds dead. Al Azhar said such strikes would amount to “an aggression against the Arab and Islamic nation… which endangers peace and international security.”

The Islamic institution insisted on “the right of the Syrian people to decide their destiny and their government for themselves in all freedom and transparency,” while condemning the “recourse to chemical weapons, whoever it was that used them.” AFP

According to the regime-affiliated daily Watan (in Arabic), the spontaneous campaign ‘Over our bodies’ has spent its first night on Mount Qasioun surrounding military locations.

Here follows the Google Translate’s crude rendering of the action. What is Syrian Arabic for “cannon fodder,” I wonder. When the US attack begins, I sure hope those folks come to their senses.

State campaign against any aggression ‘on our bodies’ spend the night in Qasion

Spent in the campaign activists ‘on our bodies’ last night in Qasion area near the vitality of the state sites there, referring them to protect those installations with their bodies in the face of any possible U.S. aggression on Syria.

He pointed out one of the volunteers in the campaign, which was launched yesterday morning for «home» to the possibility of the participation of all the pointing out that the idea is to form human shields around the centers and places vital is like the message to the world saying that the Syrian people and supported Syria in their national positions, and anyone who believes in sovereignty and freedom will not stand idly by if subjected to aggression.

The campaign team in their (Facebook page) titled ‘on our bodies’ they will not be able to protect all installations, but the largest number of them, stressing that they have decided to protect these sites with their bodies and their lives.
The team explained that the campaign extended to include organizations and representatives of those organizations, and were it not for the security situation in Syria and the difficulty of coming to being of areas far كأميركا the South, for example, were شاركوهم, but there will be representatives of the Cuban-Arab Friendship Association.

The campaign pointed out that their official page (Facebook) published details of place and time exist, and are available in English and Arabic to the fact that in solidarity with Syrian activists are not all Arabs.

The online Watan has not yet learned how to include links, so I cannot give coordinates to the Facebook campaign “On our bodies.” I seriously doubt that security forces will allow anyone onto protected ground, let alone surround key installations. The massive amount of military installations on and to the north of Mt Qasioun are larger than metropolitan Damascus.

The Syrian amy is believed to have tested firing systems for chemical weapons in the desert at the end of August, according to witness reports. The tests apparently took place near the country’s largest chemical weapons facility at Safira.

[…]

The Syrian army is believed to have tested missile systems for poison gas shells at the end of August, statements from various witnesses indicate.

The tests took place near a chemical weapons research center at Safira east of Aleppo, witnesses told SPIEGEL. A total of five or six empty shells devised for delivering chemical agents were fired by tanks and aircraft, at a site called Diraiham in the desert near the village of Khanasir.

Iranian officers believed to be members of the Revolutionary Guards were flown in by helicopter for the testing, according to the statements.

The Safira research center is regarded as Syria’s largest testing site for chemical weapons. It is officially referred to as a “scientific research center.”

Except for the anxious and weak GCC whose security is entirely dependent on the USA and who are therefore obliged to flirt with Israel, most Arab countries mistrust and hate the USA more than any other country.

After Iraq, these Arab countrie will never tolerate another US military aggression on any Arab country under any pretext.

Our well informed and highly reliable sources authorized us to release the following heads up.

After scraping the SS antiaircraft deal this morning, the Kremlin decided to scrap yet another deal it made with Obscene Head. The Iskander surface to surface missile deal is now history.

Following the deal scraping announcement, Putin tried to reach Prince Bandar by phone hoping the Prince would be amenable to reopening negotiations now that Putin reneged on two deals he made with Obscene Head. However, Putin was redirected to brief message on answering service instructing Putin that nothing less than a total public sell-out of Obscene Head would suffice for a direct answer from the Prince keeping in mind that any new offers to the Kremlin would be anti-climactic vis-a-vis offer already made and withdrawn, implying any new offers will be much much watered down versions of what was offered at the Kremlin.

It is not clear, at this point in time, how far Putin is willing to continue in his appeasement gambit towards the savvy Prince. In the meantime, finger biting at the Kremlin hit a new all time high following the scraping of the two deals and the negative response from His Highness.

“Al Azhar in Cairo, SUNNI ISLAM’S HIGHEST AUTHORITY, yesterday declared its firm opposition to any US strikes on Syria, saying this would amount to ‘an aggression against the Arab and Islamic nation’.”

“The F.B.I. has increased its surveillance of Syrians inside the United States in response to concerns that a military strike against the government of President Bashar al-Assad could lead to terrorist attacks here or against American allies and interests abroad, according to current and former senior United States officials.
————— This is what it meant:
The F.B.I. has increased its surveillance of Syrians’ Muslim Sunni inside the United States since president Obama decided not to carry a military strike in Syria. Muslim Brotherhoods, jihadists, Islamists, Wahhabis, Al-Qaeda and their sympathizers could plan terrorist attacks here in the U.S. or against American allies and interests abroad, according to anonymous, well-informed and highly reliable sources-

An Egyptian political figure described Yusuf Al-Qaradawi’s support for a possible US aggression on Syria as treacherous.

Hamed Jabr, a senior member of Egypt’s Al-Karama Party said that by backing a likey American attack on Syria during his Friday prayers sermon, president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars Yusuf Al-Qaradawi insulted Syria as he had previously insulted Egypt.

He said what Al-Qaradawi did was treachery adding that Islam does not approve of welcoming aggressors and occupiers.

Former Egyptian presidential candidate Abul-Izz Al-Hariri, too, regarded Al-Qaradawi’s move as un-Islamic and rooted in his ignorance about religious and political issues.

Al-Qaradawi, the Egyptian born Mufti of Qatar, in his Friday prayers sermon in Doha supported military intervention in Syria and claimed that foreign forces are a means sent by God for taking revenge from the killers of hundreds in Syria.

Exclusive: USS Nimitz carrier group rerouted for possible help with Syria

WASHINGTON – The nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and other ships in its strike group are heading west toward the Red Sea to help support a limited U.S. strike on Syria, if needed, defense officials said on Sunday.

The Nimitz carrier strike group, which includes four destroyers and a cruiser, has no specific orders to move to the eastern Mediterranean at this point, but is moving west in the Arabian Sea so it can do so if asked.

They were deported for ‘working without a permit or license to use satellite transmitters’

AP
Published: 18:33 September 1, 2013
Gulf
Cairo: Egyptian authorities say they have deported three members of a TV crew working for the English-language version of Qatar-based news broadcaster Al Jazeera, after they were detained for nearly a week and accused of working illegally.

Former Secretary of State received gold jewellery worth half a million dollars from Saudi king

Clinton received gold jewellery worth half a million dollars from King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. The State Department said the gift included a necklace bracelet, ring and earrings. The white gold was adorned with teardrop rubies and diamonds. Clinton also got gold, sapphire and diamond jewellery worth $58,000 (Dh212,984) from Brunei’s queen.

The FBI are enjoying looking through your web history, all these videos of beheading innocent, all these visits to Jihadists websites, and all these emails and messages with extremists within the U.S. are perfect materials to put you on the watch list. Not to forget Dr. Death and Tera.

Secretary of State John Kerry’s stated casualty estimates, in particular, were “in need of adult supervision,” Cordesman said. Kerry proclaimed that precisely 1,429 were killed in the Aug 21 attack. That figure, according to Cordesman, was “far too precise. It came from one [non-governmental organization], and is simply not credible. And, to make things worse, it disagreed with the British estimate.” (It put the death toll around 350

The UN is under growing pressure from Syria to do its job and prevent an American “war of aggression,” and the Arab League demanding punishment for “war criminals” in the Syrian government.

The two identical letters delivered to the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and President of the UN Security Council, Maria Cristina Perceval call on the international body to maintain its role of protector of international legitimacy and prevent US-led aggression against Damascus, Syria’s permanent representative to the UN Bashar al-Jaafari told Sana.

The Syrian government continues to deny any use of chemical weapons on the civilian population, with Jaafari reminding of Syria’s cooperation with the UN on this issue, which was often downplayed and twisted in the western media.

“The Syrian government is the first side who asked the UN Secretary General to form an objective investigation team to investigate the use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Assal in Aleppo,” Bashar al-Jaafari said, adding that they warned, “more than a year ago, against the serious risks of the possibility of using chemical materials by the armed terrorist groups in Syria.”

Despite the Syrian government’s swift permission for the UN investigation team to probe the site of the alleged attack on August 21, some “foreign countries” launched an anti-Assad campaign accusing government forces of slaughtering their own people, Jaafari said.

“Syria has informed, in official letters, the UN Secretary General and the UNSC about the activities of these groups, which coincided with a political, diplomatic and media campaign led by some countries which are directly responsible for shedding the blood in Syria and preventing the peaceful solution in order to accuse the Syrian government of using chemical weapon,” he added.

Reporters for Le Monde spent two months clandestinely in the Damascus area alongside Syrian rebels. They describe the extent of the Syrian tragedy, the intensity of the fighting, the humanitarian drama. On the scene during chemical weapons attacks, they bear witness to the use of toxic arms by the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Jobar, Syria, by our special correspondent, Jean-Philippe Rémy

A chemical attack on the Jobar front, on the outskirts of the Syrian capital, doesn’t look like anything much at first. It’s not spectacular. Above all, it’s not detectable. And that’s the aim: by the time the rebel fighters of the Free Syrian Army who have penetrated furthest into Damascus understand that they’ve been exposed to chemical products by government forces, it’s too late. No matter which type of gas is used, it has already produced its effects, only a few hundred meters from residential areas of the Syrian capital.

At first, there is only a little sound, a metallic ping, almost a click. And in the confusion of daily combat in Jobar’s Bahra 1 sector, this sound didn’t catch the attention of the fighters of the Tahrir al-Sham (‘Liberation of Syria’) Brigade. ‘We thought it was a mortar that didn’t explode, and no one really paid attention to it,’ said Omar Haidar, chief of operations of the brigade, which holds this forward position less than 500 meters from Abbasid Square.

[ . . . ]

A few gas masks were distributed in the confusion, with priority going to the men in fixed positions where a simple wall sometimes marks the limit of rebel-held territory. Others had to make do with the insignificant protection of surgical masks.

The men under the command of ‘the Argileh’ are not the only ones in the area to have experienced a gas attack. Closer to the nearby meat market, where government tanks are stationed, the ‘special forces’ of Liwa Marawi Al-Ghouta were exposed to concentrations of chemicals that were undoubtedly stronger, judging by their effects on the fighters. We found them in hospitals, struggling for survival, in the hours following the attacks.

In Jobar, the fighters did not desert their positions, but those who stayed on the front lines – with constricted pupils and wheezing breath – were ‘terrorised and trying to calm themselves through prayer,’ admitted Abu Atal, one of the fighters of Tahrir Al-Sham.

[ . . . ]

In the northern part of Jobar, which was struck by a similar attack, General Abu Mohammad Al-Kurdi, commander of the Free Syrian Army’s first division (which groups five brigades), said that his men saw government soldiers leave their positions just before other men ‘wearing chemical protection suits’ surged forward and set ‘little bombs, like mines’ on the ground that began giving off a chemical product. The general asserted that his men had killed three of these technicians. Where are the protection suits seized from the dead? Nobody knows… The soldiers who came under attack that night said there had been a terrible panic, with men fleeing to to the rear. There are no civilians or independent sources to confirm or deny this account: no one is left in Jobar apart from the men fighting on the neighborhood’s various fronts.

French public opinion appears increasingly war-weary—Paris has yet to finish withdrawing the thousands of troops it dispatched to Mali in January—and many people have expressed concerns about intervening in Syria without a United Nations mandate.

In a survey by French polling agency BVA released Saturday, nearly two-thirds of respondents said they opposed using force in Syria.

President Barack Obama’s decision to seek congressional authority to attack Syria for alleged chemical weapons use has dismayed friends, delighted foes and prompted criticism that he’s undermined U.S. credibility.

In Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad learned the tactics of brute force from his father, Hafez, state-controlled media hailed the start of a “historic American retreat.”

Syrian deputy foreign minister Fayssal Mekdad told reporters in Damascus yesterday that, “The hesitation and the disappointment is so obvious in the words of President Obama yesterday. The confusion was clear, as well.”

“The regime people are taking great comfort from this,” said Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at Oklahoma University in Norman, Oklahoma. “They see it as a sign of Obama’s weakness, that he doesn’t really want to hurt them or get involved.”
…
Still Kay and Landis were among analysts who defended Obama’s decision, even if it’s perceived as indecisive in the Middle East and among Obama’s domestic critics.

“Critics will say this signals weakness, that America doesn’t have resolve,” Kay said. “It’s a pretty important thing for the U.S. to demonstrate to the region respect for democratic procedures.”

Landis said that, “you’ve got to say this is good for democracy to debate this.”

A delay would serve the U.S. well, Kay said, as Obama and his advisers have to take into account and prepare for the secondary effects of a strike, including even greater refugee flows to U.S. allies, such as Jordan, that neighbor Syria. “A pause gives some time to reflect,” Kay said. “At minimum, there’s time to prepare.”
…
The opposition “feels abandoned,” Landis said.
…
Louay Almokdad, a logistical coordinator for the rebel force, said that while he understood the democratic mechanisms in the U.S. and Europe, it was clear the price of delay “will be more blood.”

“We have no confidence in the U.S.’s intention to help rid the Syrians of Assad,” Colonel Ahmad Hijazi of the Free Syrian Army said by phone today from an undisclosed location. “Whatever strike that follows will just be for show.”
…
Slim Coalition

Israel, the Syrian opposition, and other critics aren’t taking into account that the U.S. has no partners for an attack on Syria, Landis and Kay said. “No NATO, no Arab League, no British,” said Kay.

“Our partners in Europe are looking spongy.”said Landis in a telephone interview. In France, the only nation ready to join the U.S. on a Syria strike, the parliament reacted to Obama’s decision by demanding its right to weigh in, a step not taken for France’s 2011 intervention in Libya.

In the U.S., analysts such as Aaron David Miller of the Wilson Center, a Washington policy institute, acknowledged the fallout from Obama’s decision.

“Forget the merits of what the president’s done; the sense of contradiction and confusion has been intensified by his decision, and no amount of reassurance” from Kerry or the president “is going to change that,” Miller said.

This clearly shows that more than 41% of the victims of this evil war were regime supporters and government soldiers.
The slogan that this war is simply about alawites killing Sunnis or an army killing its citizens is a blatant lie, assad supporters who say that most of those who died on the other side are terrorists are not telling the whole truth which is also a form of lying. If you are in the business of saving Syria first you need to stop lying and then work to end this war.
Other conclusions:
More than 17% of armed rebels who were killed were foreigners
Number of hizbullah fighters who were killed is less than 5% of foreign fighters killed in Syria.
( including Syrian rebels in the civilian casualties category is hard to explain)
The report is imperfect but it is helpful.

TEHRAN (FNA)- A senior Syrian opposition figure warned Washington that all its interests in the region will be attacked by battalions of suicide bombers formed by the Syrian opposition forces if it dares to attack Syria, stressing that homeland is more important to the dissidents than opposition to the government.

“Although, we are among the Syrian government’s opposition forces, we assume our homeland’s interests to be more important than any other interest and therefore, we have formed a number of battalions to conduct suicide operations and target the US interests in the Middle-East,” Secretary-General of al-Shabab Party Mahir Marhaj told FNA on Saturday.

He blasted the US and its allies’ warmongering policies and threats, and said, “We in al-Shabab party are highly prepared to confront any war against Syria.”

Marhaj warned the White House against the consequences of war in Syria, and said even a limited western invasion of the country will turn into an open and unlimited war with unforeseen consequences when Damascus gives back its crushing response.

We are led to believe that the SAA is camping in schools and other civilian infrastructure, that armaments are being hidden, command and control shifted to bunkers — and yet we are also led to believe that the Syrian authorities are well prepared to defend against American war power.

While Syria has been upgrading its aging defense system in recent years, it will be severely tested if a barrage of American-made missiles are fired at the country. The question is, How will Syria fare?

Syria boasts an integrated system that covers much of the most populous and strategic parts of the country. But is all that hardware in working condition after two and a half years of war? Does the Syrian military have the manpower and expertise to run the system, or is it stretched thin by the conflict? Can Syria still deploy blanket coverage since there are now pockets of the country out of its control? Did Israel’s strike inside Syria this year reveal Syrian vulnerability?

Russia’s Interfax news agency quoted a confident, if unnamed, “military diplomatic source” on Tuesday who predicted “no easy victory” if “the U.S. Army together with NATO launches an operation against Syria. Buk-M2E multirole air and missile complexes and other air defense systems are capable of making a fitting reply to aggressors.”

Experts aren’t so sure.

[…]

Estimates by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), Jane’s and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) of Assad’s pre-war defense capabilities included 365 to 550 combat aircraft (50% of which CSIS estimates may be left now with questions about pilot capability); 25 air defense brigades with some 120 to 150 surface-to-air missile batteries (most aging or obsolete); and an array of more modern short-range surface-to-air weapons, including thousands of shoulder-launched MANPADS.

Syria has purchased a highly advanced S-300 system from Russia, which can intercept targets at a much longer range and higher altitude than anything currently in Syria’s arsenal. But it hasn’t been delivered yet, and even if it arrived tomorrow, it would take months to set up and properly train Syrians to use.

[…]

According to Sean O’Connor, a Jane’s contributor and expert on air defense systems, the surface-to-air batteries and radar sites throughout the country provide overlapping coverage throughout most of the territory, though the system remains more vulnerable in its eastern half. He noted, however, that the Soviet-era systems are vulnerable to complex attacks because each one can only engage a single target at a time.

[…]

Tony Cordesman of CSIS, writing in May about the possibility of enforcing a no-fly zone (not what the U.S. and its allies are said to be leaning toward now) suggested, “It would take a massive U.S. air and cruise missile attack to suppress it quickly.”

O’Connor believes the easiest way to do that would be to send a barrage of missiles aimed at the radar sites. “Such a strike would represent a comparatively low-cost and low-risk method of greatly reducing the threat posed by the network,” he told ABC News.

“The Syrian IADS (integrated air defense system) is not capable of defeating a large-scale attack by a modern air arm. The overreliance on aging technology, technology often encountered and exploited by Western air arms, puts the overall network at significant risk,” he said.

[…]

Cordesman says the system has other vulnerabilities. “They also have aging surface-to-air missiles (SAM) that have been only partially upgraded and are vulnerable to jamming and other electronic countermeasures, as well as antiradiation missiles,” he wrote.

[…]

Cordesman pointed out in May that the fact that Israel was able to hit targets inside Syria may be a sign of how the country’s air defenses have degraded. But he also cautioned, “At the same time, this does not mean that Syria could not put up a defense or that the U.S. could simply rely on a few strikes or threats to either destroy Syria’s air defense or intimidate it into complying with U.S. demands.”

It’s unclear how far into Syria Israeli planes had to travel to conduct the bombing, or if they did at all, and how much effort Syria took to stop them, knowing it was only a limited attack. Some believe Israel may have lobbed the bombs over the border, rather than entering Syrian airspace and risking being shot down.

“But don’t look for Clinton or Obama to pocket the swag. Under law, most gifts must go to the National Archives or General Services Administration, unless recipients reimburse the U.S. Treasury for them.”

My guess is that you dropped this line intentionally from your post, with the goal of misleading and misinforming. This makes everything else you post here lack credibility.

This the last chance for Syria and for many syrians to survive. Also this the last chance for the Unitedd States to survive politically in the Near and Middle East. The strike must be too hard, otherwise Assad will remain doing more massacres and standing like a model and heroe for all antidemocratical regimes. Then the US would be forced once and again to intervene…

Just so you may know, our benefactors who are exceptionally well informed and remarkably trustworthy authorized us to release the following heads up.

Obscene Head who had been eager to identify targets of Operation Obscene Skies believes it had its wishes coming true, just like when someone encounters the ginny coming out of a bottle, by listening to news report about target banks intentionally released by the Pentagon in the last week or so.

In an effort to strike several birds with one stone, Obscene Head shuffled around huge numbers of people from place to place in order to gain the maximum benefits from Operation Falling Skies, or so he thought.

Obscene made use of its Crooked Head to give birth to Obscene Plan thus. Obscenity realized long ago that it has a huge number of army personnel whose loyalty is very much in question and can never be trusted. Disposing of them would be a dream come true. Obama would be just the right ginny: شبيك لبيك عبدك بين ايديك. Needless to say, Obscene is also fully aware of numerous dungeons in Syria packed with Syrians, and disposing of them would be another dream come true and would serve an excellent propaganda ploy utilizing them as news footage of innocent dead corps inicinerated by Operation Obscene Skies of the mighty ginny. thus Two of Obscene’s wishes come true, and there is no need to ask for the third, Obscene as it may be, it by no means is greedy. The ginny can go back to the bottle and keep the third wish as a bonus.

And voila, Obscene Plan was born out of Obscene Head:

– Shabiha get moved out of army bases and barracks into schools, hospitals and residential neighbourhoods.

– Assad disloyal troops and dispensable prisoners get moved to barracks and army bases presumed target of Operation Obscene Skies.

Now, just so you may know, is it clear to your minion heads, Assad bootlickers, here on SC, why the F.B.I. increased surveillance of Syrians in the US who are pro-Assad? I doubt it!! And by the way Microsoft does not need moderators of SC to uncover your personal details to the last time you had sex with your mate. Just ask Snowden why he is still in Russia.

Anyway, Mr. obama will enjoy his golfing and the holidays. But Obecene Head has a lot of shuffling to do from now until the holidays are over. Let’s hope it makes the right moves and shuffles the right people.

Readiness
Most of the “modern” bunkers were built after one of the hyena cousins (a shalish) of dog-poop chemical athad appropriated to its own benefit one of Syria’s largest military construction firms. I would not be surprised to find that the thugs who started by stealing soldiers rations have expanded their theft to soldier’s and equipment protection and cheated on concrete, bars, and so on. The athad-farm has always had an open thievery season and these hyenas had no qualms about the loads of national wealth they were siphoning to their bank accounts from regime contracts and privileges.

Yesterday news about the ill equipped rebels controlling much of the mechanized brigade 81 is very significant. The Brigade is the largest of the third division, whose responsibility has been terrorizing much of Damascus country’s side and the protection of brigade 155, which is one of the most important terror missile launching units of the terrorist regime mafia slipper army. The unit is responsible for much of the destruction and murder of women and children in the northern region of Syria. The regime, true to its terrorist habits, and much like it has done around every military complex it has been steadily losing over the past year and a half, it promptly began shelling, from nearby points in this highly fortified region, the civilians in the town of Rheibeh, where the brigade’s officers’ housing complex is located. More than one thousand shells were counted yesterday.But that did not impede the rebels progress on brigade 81. If in the foreseeable future, the rebels continue their steadfast progress towards “missile” brigade 155, and if they were successful in capturing that hornet net of terrorism and in destroying the launch pads of dog-poop chemical athad scuds of death, much of the northern part of Syria will then be spared the terrorist regime rain of death on civilians in cities.

Some of the rebels, themselves having served in slipper army, are abhorred at the flimsy fortification the shalish and co have built for slipper army. Throughout the conflict, the slipper army showed field incompetence, lack of appropriate hardware, and criminal level ambivalence towards the terrorist regime cannon fodder soldiers, many of whom are poor conscripts with no local connections that allow them to defect without taking up arms against the regime. Even die hard regime defenders, who meet their maker, some of whom rather with fatalistic burst of suicidal act, find little compassion from dog-poop chemical athad or from its high ranking hyena officers. In Latakia recently, families of soldiers who lost their lives in the dog-poop chemical athad bonfire to burn the country, found little compassion from the mayor of the city, who came into the funeral of their dead sons two to three hours late, stayed for five minutes with visible discomfort and annoyance and left hurriedly. shopaholic athma is no where to be seen in any of these funerals, nor are aneetha or thug-thithter bushra.

For a so-called national army, provided with highly lethal, even in their state of disrepair, equipment, to be defeated in countless local points by rag-tag, ill-equipped, disunited, unfocused rebels speaks less of the rebels’ own strength than of the criminal negligence of the leaders of such army. It is no wonder broohaha, rah rah rah must be very loud along with excessive boot licking one would encounter from the dog-poop chemical athad snorters here and elsewhere. They are covering up for one of the most horrific theft scandals called the saa.

in the end, with or without US strikes, the hyena terrorist regime and its supporters are screwed . rah rah rah will not help and it only serves to hide the stinch of trolls peeing in their pants.

For the past 2.5 years now, we have been hearing the same refrain by supporters of the Syrian opposition as well as Third Wayers (yeah, remember them? LOL), about the “hijacking” of their “revolution” by undesirable takfiris on the one hand, and the Empire and its lackeys on the other. But their very publicly articulated desire to see the US go beyond limited airstrikes, and later, their collective expressions of betrayal and disappointment at the Obama administration for failing to immediately bomb their country into submission—with some prominent social media activists even making nostalgic references to war criminals, Bush and Blair, for their “boldness” in contrast to Obama—reveals that this uprising was never hijacked.

No, this was the nature of the opposition from the very start. I am not talking here about the al-Qaeda-dominated rebels fighting on the ground, but the so-called, “moderate, secular, non-sectarian” political/ hotel-lobby opposition. It is an opposition which remains undeterred by the specter of the Iraq-ization or Libya-ization of its country. An opposition which pursues the type of political pluralism which would reduce high treason to a legitimate point of view that is entitled to popular representation. An opposition which seeks to institutionalize the type of freedom of expression that not merely tolerates, but craves, re-colonization, and which countenances sectarianism; an opposition that seeks to constitutionalize the destruction of their state, the Syrian Arab Republic. It is an opposition to the very principle of democratic opposition, whether it is defined by decolonized progressives or by hypocritical western liberals.

The United States, as well as other members of the Security Council, should remain committed to keeping world peace and maintaining the UN’s authority, instead of messing up international norms and interfering in other countries’s internal affairs.

Now, the ball is in the U.S. Congress’s court. It should seriously listen to public opinion and carefully figure out the consequences of launching such a strike.

So far the pro regime posts are shouting loud and clear about constitutional rules and regulations and the superb workings of democracy and debate and ignoring the flouting of the Thyrian constitution by the very person that formulated it for his own rule. We also discover the Azhar mouthpiece a source of great authority. The Azhar is like the muscles of the pelvic floor they only meet and work together to produce a Bowel Movement. This BM is usually immediately echoed by none other than the highest religious authority in Thouria Alathad Mr. Hassoon.

As for the Oklahoman Post that reported the downing of a Raptor. I actually searched the site and the only Raptor news is about the High School football team called the Raptors. The news came from a liveleak source that is from the regime itself.

As of today, the slipper air force has scrambled its MIG to defend the coast according to the regime trolls above. And another MIG bit the dust in Deir Ezzor destroyed by citizens forced to defend themselves.

I am actually rooting for the slipper air force to fly and defend and for the missile forces to strike and for the helicopters to swoop down and for the tanks to invade and liberate Iskanderun, Golan, Lebanon, Palestine, and even Ahwaz in Iran.

I have citizens camping up on Qasyoun to defend the MLR and the artillery battalions and I hope all of the supporters of the regime go to Force 155 and to the fourth division and the third division and the special forces units and the RG and most importantly go and mingle with HA fighters and defend the shrine of Zeinab as well.

I have loved all of the pretzel logic and the bombast as it entertains me every day.

ALI please post and Alan please post some more and as for zoo zoo i think he lost it for he no longer remembers the logic he uses about democracy being a path and we need to have a way to get there and the only one to take us there is none other than iPad butt ugly Ray Ban Giraffe Man Shoe Shine Car Wax Porsche Panamera crazed Fan.

Hehehehe the threat of a strike is even more ominous than the strike itself.

I like that and Rafsanjani coming out to accuse the regime itself is a telling one.

So far I have not heard the regime firmly reiterated their stance: Any strike from US will be considered to be an act of war and Syria government is obliged to attack Israel and other American interests in the region.

They have been busy gloating for their “victory” claiming Obama and the west are “retreating”

Those lame and impotent moves can fool some Syrians but it does not provide a shield to imminent threats to Syria.

It is those poor SAA soldiers who are facing the direct hit and blunt by US sophisticated weapons. An escalated war will perish so many Syrians because they have to defend their country from foreign aggression.

They will be becoming US’ “legitimate” targets for the reason they are in their homeland and defending their homeland.

The dangerous development is certainly beyond the regime to deal with. The cumbersome and rusty state machine is clinking like a T-55 tank which can barely move forward.

Obama plays poker, trying to bluff, while Putin plays chess and checkmates him.http://youtu.be/tgqxoHXRKu0?t=1s
You’re just a click away on your remote. Get the popcorn. It’s a blast. This one has moral stature. They used chemical weapons, so they will pay!

open your eyes wide!!!! I will not give you information more!
The Russian ships now steaming toward the eastern Mediterranean are capable of detecting cruise missile firings from Western vessels and of warning Damascus of the incoming munitions. They are also equipped with jamming equipment that could interfere with radar and communications aboard other ships in the region.

Syria cannot withstand a US-France massive attack, no one ever believe that. Syria can never win militarily against this overpowered coalition, there is no point,

Syria will defend itself passively allowing the missiles to hit civilians. Having learned the ropes from the al Ghuta “attack”, in a matter of few hours, there will be hundreds of youtube videos overflowing the media showing every single victim of the attack and the reaction of the Syrians. It’s no more Iraq or Libya where the media were totally controlled by the attackers and social media unexploited.
That would show the destruction and death that the “missiles” are doing. The aggressors will have to prepare a solid media propaganda to counter that, but being the attackers suspected by the Arabs and the Moslems of just protecting Israel, and knowing that they have manipulated the media in previous aggression, their credibility is much lower.
The more effective strategy for Syria would therefore probably be not to appear aggressive but to appear as a proud victim of a thuggish USA aggression on a small and resilient country they’ve weakened for decades to protect their ally, Israel.

Fighting Continues Across Syria
Heavy fighting continued throughout Syria yesterday, with Damascus bearing the brunt of it. Many of the locations on the heatmap below indicate regime bombardments and airstrikes, but in Aleppo the rebels took the offensive, with attacks on a military checkpoint near al-Safira and a fuel center.http://iswsyria.blogspot.be/

One wonders why there was such a big fuss about sending UN experts to the scene of the crime, when NATO, the USA and France say have all the proofs without being there.
The strange part is that Russia who has lots of physical presence in Syria say” It’s a nonsense, instead of wild accusations, expose all the proofs or you are not credible”

The SEA is often depicted as a group of hackers who strongly support the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Many believe that it emerged in May 2011, during the first Syrian uprisings, when it started attacking a wide array of media outlets and non-profits and spamming popular Facebook pages like President Obama’s and Oprah Winfrey’s with pro-Assad comments.

As the area around Syria is recently becoming even more heated than before and a foreign intervention into the civil war in the country appears to be more and more possible every day now, apparently the hackers had something in mind.

The hackers of the Syrian Electronic Army left a message to their US counterparts, calling them “brothers” and openly targeting President Obama.

The Independent released a screenshot of the hacked website showing the message that read: “Dear US Marines, this is a message written by your brothers in the Syrian army who have been fighting Al-Qaeda for the last 3 years. We understand your patriotism and love for your country so please understand our love for ours”.

The hackers added that “Obama is a traitor who wants to put your lives in danger to rescue Al-Qaeda insurgents… The Syrian army should be your ally not your enemy”.

Is Obama showing he is a weak or a wise and democratic president by asking the American people to make the choice and also to bear the consequences of that choice?

I believe Obama has done right. After the crimes of Iraq, no more decision to kill or be killed should rely exclusively on the president. Let the Americans participate in the decision. Isn’t what democracy is all about?

NATO said it won’t get involved in a military campaign against Syria, reflecting divisions among U.S. allies as President Barack Obama lobbies Congress for the go-ahead to bomb Syrian targets.

While the trans-Atlantic alliance condemns Syria’s use of chemical weapons, its role will be confined to providing a forum for consultations and defending Turkey against a possible spillover of the Syrian civil war, Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said.

“It’s for individual allies to decide how they will respond,” Rasmussen told reporters in Brussels today. “You don’t need the NATO command-and-control system to conduct such a short, measured, tailored military operation.”

ROME (Reuters) – The core group of nations making up the Friends of Syria will meet on September 8 in Rome, a diplomatic source said on Monday.

The meeting will most probably be attended by foreign ministers from the 11 countries making up the core group, the source said. Those countries include France, the United States, Britain, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Obama’s problem is not just that he intends to intervene militarily but that he intends to do it half-heartedly.

At the same time, however, Congress will probably give its consent when it comes down to casting the final vote, giving Obama the green light to commit what is most likely to be the largest foreign policy mistake of his presidency. The problem is not just that he intends to intervene militarily, but that he intends to do it half-heartedly.
…
Although the U.S. and its allies could easily crush organized resistance and overthrow tyrannical regimes by virtue of their huge military superiority, they were powerless to stop guerrilla movements that operate without centralized command centers. And the guerillas were bound to prevail because the local populations actively resisted attempts by foreign troops to instill “democracy at gunpoint.”

But now Obama has gone even further. Not only does the military lack a clearly defined goal that, once achieved, would make the operation a success. Obama’s vague intention to “punish” the Assad regime is just as senseless from a military standpoint as “establishing democracy” with guns and bombs. By limiting the scale of operations beforehand, Obama sends a clear signal that Assad has only to weather a few losses before continuing to assail the rebels unhindered.

Obama believes that U.S. air strikes can prevent Assad from using chemical weapons again. At the same time, U.S. officials explained that the U.S. would not attack storage facilities for those weapons because the resulting number of victims could far exceed those who have already died in the Damascus suburbs. That means the goal of the attacks would be to force Assad to guarantee that he would not use chemical weapons in the future. But how can the U.S. achieve that goal if the Assad knows in advance that the U.S. military campaign will be limited in scope?
…
Obama has maneuvered himself into a corner. The whole world remembers how, one year ago, he declared that the use of chemical weapons was a “red line” that he would not allow the Assad regime to cross. Now Obama has only one alternative: to try to punish the Syrian regime and risk getting drawn into a civil war, or else eat his words by ignoring the fact that Assad has flouted all of his warnings and threats. This becomes a choice between bad and very bad.

Then there is the question of Russia’s role in the current situation. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has correctly said Western military intervention in Syria is fraught with the risk of unpredictable consequences.
At the same time, however, about a year ago then-U.S. Senator Richard Lugar proposed that Moscow work with Washington to establish international control over Syria’s chemical weapons. Russia ignored that proposal in the firm conviction that the Syrian authorities would act responsibly and not use chemical weapons. Had Russia followed up on that initiative, the U.S. would not be threatening Syria with air strikes today.

I don’t believe that because Obama claims to want “only” a small attack anyone should buy into that. Obama is a liar and a killer. He has murdered many innocent people in the world. The only reason for this war is because Obama, and his allies, have been arming these filthy animals – the beheaders and cannibals.

Obama knows a war would murder innocent civilians and would not end the current war. Is he delusional to the point of believing an attack would overthrow Assad? Assad will be fine – the people of Syria will be the ones murdered by Obama’s attack.

pyrrhic, impotent, dumb, and vicious as well. Marines.com has nothing to do with the US Marines. Any dumb hacker knows that the US military has a different domain name than com. It is probably a parked domain from some poor greedy sap who though that by buying the Marines.com site they can make a fortune or a site selling military paraphernalia to other poor saps who could not join the US Marines.

This is the type of victories we always see from the pieces of national shxxt and their boot lickers. Instead of focusing their efforts on ensuring that the dumb jerks in the Syrian parliament have passwords that are not 12345 and on improving the cultural contributions of Syrians to an anemic Arabic Wikipedia, we find them going after cheep victories against unsuspecting vulnerable domaini owners and web-site operators. This is like the time these dumb jerks hacked into another poor sap’s royal wedding website.

L O S E R S making Pyrrhic victories and lying to fool people that they have hacked into the real marine site. Not different at all from their master dog-poop chemical athad shxxting in its pants from Israel and the US and making victories by murdering innocent Syrian children with mass murder weapons such as scuds and poisonous chemicals and gas.

Syria will not be a haven for petty cyber terrorists wannabe . It will be a beacon of IT and ICT progress, and we’ll make sure of that after we remove the dog-poop chemical athad tail of the thyrian informoathion thothiety.

Omen The senate will approve, as they are more democrat than republican, and there are several republican senators who support to strike Assad, the problem is in the house, split decision is in favor of a strike, since the president favor it.

From a military perspective, of course Syria’s air defenses could not withstand an all-out attack from the US (just like Israel could not withstand an all-out attack from Hezbollah-Iran and Syria). A sustained air campaign would destroy Syria’s air force – not their missiles because those are largely mobile. I don’t know how long it would take to degrade Syria’s air force – 60 days is what Gen. Dempsey wrote I believe. But, during that attack, what does Iran do? Hezbollah? The rest of the world? I think if Syria is attack both Iran and Hezbollah will become involved in the war and the war will spread throughout the entire region. Beating Syrian air defense isn’t so easy, and even if that is accomplished, that alone doesn’t defeat Syria. Soldiers would have to be there on the ground to secure that sort of victory. The US won’t do that. They will rely on their mercenaries. The US tried this in Iraq and didn’t win. They were able to murder over a 1,000,000 Iraqis (combined attack and sanctions) though.

The latest revelations about the authorisation of chemical exports to Syria proves that British ministers should avoid two things – lecturing the public on personal morality and lecturing the world on human rights. Both will come back to bite them. While Nick Clegg commented on the pages of the Guardian earlier this year that the UK was a “beacon for human rights”, his business secretary was authorising companies to sell chemicals capable of being used to make nerve gas to a country in the middle of a civil war.

(I have the feeling that most of you do not know that the UK used chemical weapons on more than one occasion and even defended their use. One major reason why there is so much opposition to chemical weapons is that they give less powerful nations a deterrence power, I do not believe the West is in a position to lecture others about WMD)

Omen want to see how ridiculous you, and others, are? Good. Here we go: You seem to believe that any American attack will be met with the surrender of the Syrian government followed by a Cannibal Victory Parade in Damascus. It won’t. What will happen is Syria, and her allies, will fight and many Syrians will die. You have a fantasy that this is the end for Assad and Co. but you’ve been saying that for nearly 50,000 tweets. If I was bored I could go back on your TL and see you ranting and raving two years ago. I prefer not to do that. I think you’re sick in the head – very sick in the head. Delusional fantasies aside, in reality you’re calling for Syrians to die in an American attack on a country that hasn’t attacked America. That’s is disgusting.

One of the leaders of the Syrian rebel groups had praise on Sunday for none other than Israeli Housing Minister Uri Ariel of the Bayit Yehudi party.

Abu Adnan, one of the rebel leaders in northern Syria, spoke to Israel’s Channel One News and expressed his appreciation for Ariel’s comments regarding the chemical attack near Damascus.

“Allow me to send a message of thanks and appreciation to Housing Minister Uri Ariel for his humane and valuable statements and for his beautiful expression of emotion toward the children killed in Syria and toward the women being killed in Syria,” Abu Adnan told the channel’s Arab affair analyst Oded Granot.

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources made the following heads up available for release.

French Intelligence made it clear that Assad was personally responsible for the chemical attack agaist civilians which took place in Ghouta recenrtly. F.I. also made it clear that Assad himself supervised the attack in terms of selecting targets, the scope of the attack and the ensuing deliberate evidence tampering which followed.

It remains to be seen if such intelligence will be put into use by seeking to apprehend Assad himself in person , and bring him to face intermational tribunal at the Hague, for common sense compels that no other punitive action would be sufficient otherwise. It also remains to be seen whether the new revelation would force a revision in terms of defining any planned military operation as a war on Syria or simply as a legitimate act of apprehending a rogue criminal, thus negating the need(s) for so-called approval from legislative assemblies around the world. Consensus is now building that any action would be defined on the basis of criminal law rather than so-called rules of engagement among nations. It has been suggested that the nations involved in any military operation do not have any quarrels with the Syrian people. Their beef is rather with Assad himself, and no one else.

It looks more and more that this is an operation best undertaken by Navy Seals and there may not be need for Tomahawks or air strikes after all.

“We were shown certain pieces of evidence that did not contain anything concrete, neither geographical locations, nor names, nor evidence that samples had been taken by professionals,” Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov said in a speech at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.

Lavrov threatened that Geneva 2 will be postponed ” for a long time or forever” if a strike against Syria is conducted, he also complained that nobody outside NATO has access to what Kerry called irrefutable but “classified” evidence that the West has, that led Lavrov to believe that such evidence does not exist, in plain English, Lavrov is calling Kerry a liar, however, he still plans on meeting with him next month or sooner !!

“We were shown certain pieces of evidence that did not contain anything concrete, neither geographical locations, nor names, nor evidence that samples had been taken by professionals,” Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov said in a speech at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations.

Lavrov complained that Kerry’s ” irrefutable” evidence is kept secret which led him to believe that there is no such evidence.

Former deputy chief of the United Nations Hans-Christof von Sponeck launched the appeal in Swiss daily Le Temps’ online edition, with support from his former UN colleagues Denis Halliday, Said Zulficar, Samir Radwan and Samir Basta.

…
“The time when the United States and the few allies it still has acted as the world police is over. The world has become more multifaceted and the people of the world want more sovereignty, not less,” he stressed.

“The Syrian, Iranian and Russian governments have made proposals to negotiate, which have been treated with disdain by the West.

“Those who say: ‘We cannot talk or negotiate with Assad’ forget that people said the same thing” about a range of regimes and revolutionary movements like the Soviet Union, the Palestinian PLO, Irish IRA and former South African president Nelson Mandela and his ANC movement, among others,” he pointed out.

Instead going into conflicts with bombs blazing, Western powers should focus on helping the parties settle their differences.

“For Israel to negotiate in good faith with the Palestinians, organise the Geneva 2 conference (to end the conflict in) Syria, and talk with the Iranians about their nuclear programme,” von Sponeck suggested.

FACT: There is no definitive proof that Syria’s Assad knew of and directed the chemical weapons attack on August 21st.

FACT: Intelligence which overheard Syrian military officials discussing the attack — far from implicating them — finds them denying they initiated an attack.

FACT: There are at least two instances where the opposition is said to have used chemical weapons. One incident, which occurred in March, was referred to the Security Council by Russia. Another, which occurred in April, was cited by special UN investigator Carla Del Ponte.

FACT: Some rockets identified near attack sites were described as homemade.

FACT: A coordinated effort was made by U.S. officials to discourage a full UN investigation.

FACT: The biggest beneficiary of the attack on the Syrian government is al-Qaida, which leads the opposition.

FACT: Syria is not an imminent threat to the United States.

FACT: Absent an imminent or actual threat to the United States, only Congress has the authority, under the Constitution, Article I, Section 8, to declare war.

Fears Western intervention in Syria may spark a wider regional war were raised on Monday after Hezbollah warned it would retaliate against Israel in the event of an attack.

The Lebanese Shia group said it would respond to a US attack with missile strikes of its own, directed at Israel. The group said it would launch the retaliatory strike from within Syria – where its fighters have been supporting the Syrian army in its fight against rebels for the past year – in order to shield Lebanon from becoming embroiled in the conflict.

“Hezbollah is controlling 8,000km in Homs and will not hesitate to participate in an attack by firing surface-to-surface missiles from Syria,” a source from the joint operations between Hezbollah and Syrian forces said in comments published in the Kuwaiti al-Rai newspaper.

UK could yet respond with force to any new Syria attacks
…
Britain yesterday left open the door for participating in military strikes against Syria – but only in response to new atrocities by the Assad regime and not at any point in the immediate future.

I think people I’ve spoken to within the Syrian regime quite like being eyeball-to-eyeball with the US. I think they believe President Obama is bent on attacking Syria, in fact that’s what they say quite openly.

A BBC poll shows about three-quarters of the British public believe MPs were right to reject UK military action in Syria in a vote last week

Out of all her behavior, I am amazed with this the most:
“Asma Assad, 38, orders Western food so her children don’t eat Syrian cuisine all the time”
Yes to peanut butter jelly and waffles and pancakes and no to zit w Zaatar, no to labneh, and no to zaitoun. Oh La La. That is so classy.

‘She is at the centre of a fool’s court,’ he said. Bashar has been branded ‘a thug and a murderer’ by US Secretary of State John Kerry, but Asma ‘continues to view herself as the respectable wife of a president’ according to Mr Nour.

He added: ‘She is convinced her family will rule Syria for years to come. And she is particularly interested in growing the family wealth and making sure they keep it.

‘She wants to be certain her son, Hafez, will take over as president one day, even if this means hiding him in a school or college in Switzerland or Britain for a time.’

Of her recent purchases, Mr Nour said: ‘Asma Assad has no heart. She is obsessed by how chic and beautiful she looks. She continues to lead a life of utter luxury. That’s all that matters to her.’

TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE

August 31, 2013

Dear Mr. Speaker:

(Dear Mr. President:)

I transmit herewith the attached draft legislation regarding
Authorization for Use of United States Armed Forces in
connection with the conflict in Syria.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA

Whereas, on August 21, 2013, tl1e Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons
attack in the suburbs of Damascus, Syria, killing more than 1,000 innocent
Syrians;

Whereas these flagrant actions were in violation of international norms and the laws of
war;

Whereas the United States and 188 other countries comprising 98 percent of the world’s
population are parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits the
development, production, acquisition, stockpiling or use of chemical weapons;

Whereas, in the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003,
Congress found that Syria’s acquisition of weapons of mass destruction threatens
the security of the Middle East and the national security interests of the United
States;

Whereas the United Nations Security Council, in Resolution 1540 (2004), affirmed that
the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons constitutes a threat
to international peace and security;

Whereas, the objective of the United States’ use of military force in connection with this
authorization should be to deter, disrupt, prevent, and degrade the potential for,
future uses of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction;

Whereas, the conflict in Syria will only be resolved through a negotiated political
settlement, and Congress calls on all parties to the conflict in Syria to participate
urgently and constructively in the Geneva process; and

Whereas, unified action by the legislative and executive branches will send a clear signal
of American resolve.

SEC. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES

Authorization.- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the
United States as he determines to be necessary a11d appropriate in connection with
the use of chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in the conflict
in Syria in order to”

(1) prevent or deter the use or proliferation (including the transfer to terrorist
groups or other state or non-<
(1) Specific Statutory Autliorizatioiir Consistent with section of the
War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended
to constitute specific statutory authorization the meaning of section
5(b) of the Wa1'Powe1's Resolution.

(2) Applicability of other Nothing in this joint resolution
supersedes any 1'equi1'ement of the War Powers Resolution.

(The language used and described as vague and open ended will have to change or the Congress will most likely defeat the proposal)

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources authorized the release of the following heads up.

The highly placed benefactors behind these heads up have worked around the clock and behind the scenes in order to prevent the US from descending into the staple object of sarcasm and irony as we see signs of it already making headways from reading this report:

”

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Attempting to quell criticism of his proposal for a limited military mission in Syria, President Obama floated a more modest strategy today, saying that any U.S. action in Syria would have “no objective whatsoever.”

“Let me be clear,” he said in an interview on CNN. “Our goal will not be to effect régime change, or alter the balance of power in Syria, or bring the civil war there to an end. We will simply do something random there for one or two days and then leave.”

“I want to reassure our allies and the people of Syria that what we are about to undertake, if we undertake it at all, will have no purpose or goal,” he said. “This is consistent with U.S. foreign policy of the past.”

While Mr. Obama clearly hoped that his proposal of a brief and pointless intervention in Syria would reassure the international community, it immediately drew howls of protest from U.S. allies, who argued that two days was too open-ended a timeframe for such a mission.

That criticism led White House spokesman Jay Carney to brief reporters later in the day, arguing that the President was willing to scale down the U.S. mission to “twenty-four hours, thirty-six tops.”

“It may take twenty-four hours, but it could also take twelve,” Mr. Carney said.

“Maybe we get in there, take a look around, and get out right away. But however long it takes, one thing will not change: this mission will have no point. The President is resolute about that.”
”

The French intelligence notes that the CERS is composed of Alawis and Alawis only. And although the regime is secular but it only employs Alawis in such positions across all sectors. It is it time to coin a phrase to fit this kind of sectarian secularism. Yes they do not impose Alawi “sharia” (so to speak) on people but utilize Alawis to keep the Syrian state oppressed. I invite all our great thinkers to find us a descriptive accurate term for that. And yeah..congratulation to Alawis for this heritage.

The chain of command and the responsibilities, the report says the Syrian Centre for Scientific Research Study (CERS) is responsible for producing toxic agents for use in war, pinpointing “Branch 450” as being responsible for filling munitions with chemicals and also the security of sites where the chemical agents are stocked.

This branch, the French report claims, is “composed only of Alawite military personnel…distinguished by a high level of loyalty to the regime”. It adds:

Bashar al Assad and certain influential members of his clan are the only ones permitted to give the order for the use of chemical weapons. The order is then transmitted to those responsible at the competent branches of the CERS.

At the same time, the army chiefs of staff receive the order and decide on targets, the weapons and the toxic agents to put in them.

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources made the following heads up available for release.

Our highly placed benefactors would like you to know that they are doubling their around the clock efforts and behind the scene covert operations to safeguard against further descent towards ridicule, satire and sarcasm which has become a rich food for thought all thanks to no-drama-Obama, and also due to our own shotcomings having greatly underestimated Obscene Head’s ‘sense of humor’ as we discover from reading the following report:

”
So, What Is It Going to Be?

Well, here we are. It’s been two years of fighting, over 100,000 people are dead, there are no signs of this war ending, and a week ago I used chemical weapons on my own people. If you don’t do anything about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. If you do something about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. Morally speaking, you’re on the hook for those deaths no matter how you look at it.

So, it’s your move, America. What’s it going to be?

I’ve looked at your options, and I’m going to be honest here, I feel for you. Not exactly an embarrassment of riches you’ve got to choose from, strategy-wise. I mean, my God, there are just so many variables to consider, so many possible paths to choose, each fraught with incredible peril, and each leading back to the very real, very likely possibility that no matter what you do it’s going to backfire in a big, big way. It’s a good old-fashioned mess, is what this is! And now, you have to make some sort of decision that you can live with.

So, where do I begin? Well, this is just the tip of the iceberg, but let’s start with the fact that my alliance with Russia and China means that nothing you decide to do will have the official support of the UN Security Council. So, right off the bat, I’ve already eliminated the possibility of a legally sound united coalition like in Libya or the First Gulf War. Boom. Gone. Off the table.

Now, let’s say you’re okay with that, and you decide to go ahead with, oh, I don’t know, a bombing campaign. Now, personally, I can see how that might seem like an attractive option for you. No boots on the ground, it sends a clear message, you could cripple some of my government’s infrastructure, and it’s a quick, clean, easy way to punish me and make you look strong in the face of my unimaginable tyranny. But let’s get real here. Any bombing campaign capable of being truly devastating to my regime would also end up killing a ton of innocent civilians, as such things always do, which I imagine is the kind of outcome you people would feel very guilty about. You know, seeing as you are so up in arms to begin with about innocent Syrians dying. Plus, you’d stoke a lot of anti-American hatred and quite possibly create a whole new generation of Syrian-born jihadists ready to punish the United States for its reckless warmongering and yadda yadda yadda.

Okay, what else? Well, you could play small-ball and hope that limited airstrikes to a few of my key military installations will send me the message to refrain from using chemical weapons again, but, c’mon, check me out: I’m ruthless, I’m desperate, and I’m going to do everything I can to stay in power. I’d use chemical weapons again in a heartbeat. You know that. And I know you know that. Hell, I want to help you guys out here, but you gotta be realistic. Trust me, I am incapable of being taught a lesson at this point. Got it? I am too far gone. Way too far gone.

Oh, and I know some of you think a no-fly zone will do the trick, but we both know you can’t stomach the estimated $1 billion a month that would cost, so wave bye-bye to that one, too.

Moving on.

I suppose you could always, you know, not respond with military force at all. But how can you do that? I pumped sarin gas into the lungs of my own people, for God’s sake! You can’t just let me get away with that, can you? I mean, I guess you easily could, and spare yourself all of this headache, but then you would probably lose any of your remaining moral high ground on the world stage and make everything from the Geneva Conventions to America’s reputation as a beacon for freedom and democracy around the world look like a complete sham.

And, hey, as long as we’re just throwing stuff out there, let’s consider a ground invasion for a moment. Now, even if you could reasonably fund a ground invasion, which I’m pretty sure you can’t, what exactly would such an invasion accomplish in the long term? I suppose it’s possible that you could come in and sweep me out the door and that would be the end of it. It’s possible. You know, like, in the sense that seeing a majestic white Bengal tiger in the wild is possible. Or, more likely, you could find yourself entrenched in a full-blown civil war that drags on for 15 years and sets off further turmoil in the rest of the region, leading to even more dead bodies for your country and mine, and even more virulent hatred of America. In fact, boy, maybe this is the one option that should be totally off the table.

Oh, and speaking of me being toppled from power, let’s say, just for fun, that tomorrow I were to somehow be dethroned. Who’s in charge? Half of these rebel groups refuse to work with one another and it’s getting harder to tell which ones are actually just Islamic extremists looking to fill a potential power vacuum. We’ve got Christians, Sunnis, and Shias all poised to fight one another for control should I fall. You want to be the ones sorting through that mess when you’re trying to build a new government? I didn’t think so.

So, all in all, quite the pickle you’re in, isn’t it? I have to say, I do not envy you here. Really curious to see where you go with this one.

I’ll leave you with this: I am insane. Not insane enough to generate worldwide unanimity that I cannot remain in charge of my own country. That would make this a lot easier. No, unfortunately, I’m just sane and stable enough to remain in power and devise cunning military and political strategies while at the same time adhering to a standard of morality that only the most perverse and sociopathic among us would be capable of adopting. But nevertheless, I am insane, so do with that information what you will.

Long story short, I’m going to keep doing my best to hold on to my country no matter what the cost. If that means bombing entire towns, murdering small children, or shooting at UN weapons inspectors, so be it. I’m in this for the long haul. And you will do…whatever it is you’re going to do, which is totally up to you. Your call.

Published on Sep 2, 2013
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) joins CNN’s News Room to discuss his opposition of U.S. military intervention in Syria. Stand with Grayson by signing the petition at DontAttackSyria.com

This Nasheed is dedecated to one of the most heroic icons the Resistance has. Ghaleb Awali

Ghalib Awali, a member of the Islamic Resistance, was assassinated on Mouawwad Street in the southern suburb of Beirut in July 2004
Michel Abdo confessed to collaborating with the “Israeli” Mossad in the assassination of Ghaleb Awal.

Just so you may know, the following heads up is now officially released.

The French have decided to have it both ways. Their parliament will debate but not decide the go ahead or go backward. There will be no vote. The decision is left for the prez.

This confirms our previous heads up about a consensus building towards considering the issue subject to criminal law proceedings and not the rules of engagements among nations. However, only arresting the criminal in this case will prove the determination of those behind enforcing the law.

In order to save face and serve Hollande and his goons, French intelligence is going to present us another “indisputable” evidence on the regime including Assad himself being directly behind the CW attack.

We cannot wait to see French government and its “well-known” intelligence to re-establish their credential for capability and reputation of honesty finally.

In Syria and in particular among ranks of SAA, no one asks others’ sect, it is like a taboo. So how French government found out in CERS there are only Alawite?

Tara, you deliberately disperse lies to serve your own sectarian hatred. That is shameful as usual based on your records here on SC.

Do you know what the purpose the CERS was established in the first place? We happen to know several guys with CERS. There are Sunni and Alawi even Christian. Which one you prefer to come out to debunk you?

Please don’t make a fool of yourself. You have no reputation here. Now your foolish comment manages to outdo your laughable intelligence.

RUSSIAN SPY SHIP “BIRYAZHOFIYA” MOVES FROM SEVASTOPOL IN THE BLACK SEA TO THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN FOR UNDISCLOSED PURPOSES.

It is now confirmed, the Russian naval electronic surveillance ship, the Biryazhofiya, is on its way from Sevastopol in the Black Sea to the Eastern Mediterranean. SANA reports that the ship will have a connection to unfolding events in Syria but will not join the fleet presently off the coast of Tartous. The order to weigh anchor was sudden and reflects Russian concern over American-French impetuousness.

“The French intelligence notes that the Centre for Scientific Research Study (CERS)is composed of Alawis and Alawis only”

Your a pathetic liar, the CERS takes up all kind of people including Sunnis, Alawis, Kurds, Druz, and they’re even take Palestinian. As a matter of fact at the time when Dr. Imad Sabouni (the current information and telecommunication minister) was the head of CERS he chose Dr. Bayan Fadel (Palestinian) as his deputy.

Tara “we” means the normal people. The ones who don’t want Syrian babies murdered by Obama. That’s who “we” are. This is opposed to the bootlickers, beggars, cannibals, beheaders and other cowards who ask the Americans to murder Syrians.

The French intelligence report says that the Syrian chemical weapons programme began in the 1970s and states that Damascus has more than 1,000 tonnes of chemical agents making it “one of the most important operational stocks in the world”.

It describes Syria’s chemical arsenal as “particularly massive and diverse”, including Yperite, VX (one of the most toxic chemical agents known) and “several hundred tonnes of sarin”.

The sarin and the VX … are partly stocked in a binary form, that is to say kept in the form of two chemical products called precursors, that are mixed just before use.

This technique and the associated procedures show a great knowledge of the technology of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.

It adds that the Syrian regime is capable of delivering its chemical weapons “with a very large range of several thousand vectors.”

These, it says, include Scud C, Scud B, M500 missiles, bombs and artillery rockets with a range of up to 500km.

Certain missiles can carry up to several hundred litres of toxic agent.

She has to live with the retard iPad Ray Ban Garbage Man. He is ugly, stupid, conceited, full of himself, and she has at times to share his bed !!!! Oh Lord, have mercy on her as she struggles to raise three children the elder of which is already a thug in training.

Now we are told that Thouria will not be able to withstand an assault by Western powers let alone Israel bombing sites here and there with impunity. So pray tell us why did we have to suffer 45 years of emergency rule, billions spent on Russian junk, hundreds of thousands of security personnel, and total dictatorship?

Oh I forgot, it is to keep the clan and the sect in power; power over a garbage dump; and for eternal non resistance to screw the people many times over.

Athad is threatening France. I like that very much indeed. There goes the man in the Ray Ban Garbage man.

Where is the response to the coming attack? Where is the region in flames? where is the fire that will engulf Israel? Where is the Persian missile defense and offense system?

So far the slipper army has only been able to destroy the country especially when there is no chance that the other side might hit back with something similar. When the other side hits back, the slipper army folds and folds again and again and again and continues to “reserve the right to respond in the right place at the right time of its choosing”. Well, I am holding my breath.

How about quoting real debates in Western democracies as an example for the retard to emulate don’t you think trolls of the SC site?

ALI please give us your assessment of the combat capability of the Russian rusting navy.

Dubai: The rebel Free Syrian Army says it is benefiting from a delay in an expected US-led strike on Syria and has guaranteed President Bashar al-Assad’s forces that they and their families will be unharmed if they defect.

“We are now taking advantage of this delay to make better plans and have also issued a statement calling on officers of the Syrian regular army to defect and join our ranks,” Mohammed Almustafa, media coordinator for the FSA’s General Salim Idriss, said.

“We have given them guarantees that we will protect them and their families from getting killed or being harmed in any way,” Mr Almustafa said. “Those who carried out massacres will be subjected to a fair trial.”
More than 400 people defected lately, most recently in the eastern city of Deir Ezzour, he said.

Go all the way or stop the verbal hysteria and negotiate.
Obama and his team, Pentagon, US army and CIA etc.. after 3 years of intense thinking have come up with an “idiotic” plan.
It says a lot about the competence of Obama in foreign policy matters carried by the diva Hillary then the clown Kerry: Zero

A sceptical public recognises the futility of launching a missile strike that will not topple Bashar al-Assad

…
That is why the public on both sides of the Atlantic are sceptical. They cannot see the point of their leaders puffing up their chests, rattling their sabres and talking tough, when all these leaders intend to do is rearrange the furniture on the outskirts of Damascus – and boost Syrian morale if they have to back down. If the west really wants to “save Syria”, it should go in and save it. Otherwise shut up. It is not the west’s “values empire” that is in retreat. It is idiot deployment of aerial bombardment as a cure-all for the world’s ills. That at least is good news.

“ALI please give us your assessment of the combat capability of the Russian rusting navy”

I’ll share a secret with you, in the last two years the Syrian and Russian armies have fully integrated their capabilities. They did prepare for the last day on this planet and decided if anybody to touch Syria then there’s no point of leaving this earth in one piece.

There are two red buttons to launch a full capacity attack including every sort of weapons on this earth (the Russian atomic ones were excluded). These buttons are with Bashar and Putin, and they need to press them simultaneously in order to open doors of hell against enemies of al-ASSAD

You will be surprised when this “rusty” navy gets into action. At that time Europe will see no night, even people from Portugal will be able to see the flames of burned ships in the Mediterranean.

Exasperated? Poor thing! Saudi Arabia has billions of dollars worth of military equipment, why are they asking the West to attack Syria, why don’t they do it themselves to finally show that they are not “half-men”?
I guess Bashar al Assad was totally right when he said to Saudi Arabia and some of the GCC countries that they are half-men. It took a few years to show that they are also pathetic loud voice cowards

“We call upon the international community with all its power to stop this aggression against the Syrian people,” Faisal said in Cairo, where he was attending a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers to discuss Syria.

Syria has appealed to the UN to try to “prevent any aggression” against it and said US military action would amount to “support for Al Qaida and its affiliates,” even as President Barack Obama today lobbied with war-weary American lawmakers to convince them for a strike.
“The Syrian government calls on the UN Secretary-General to assume his responsibilities… and to make efforts to prevent any aggression against Syria,” the state-run SANA news agency said, quoting a letter from Syria’s UN representative Bashar al-Jaafari.
The letter also called on the United Nations to help seek a “peaceful political solution to the crisis” in Syria.

Meanwhile, a senior Syrian minister was quoted as saying by BBC that any US military action against Syria would amount to “support for Al Qaida and its affiliates”. “Any attack against Syria is support for Al Qaida and its affiliates, whether Jabat al-Nusra or the State of Islam in Syria and Iraq,” Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Muqdad said.
Mr Muqdad, who is considered to be highly influential within President Bashar al-Assad’s government, also warned that possible US intervention would deepen “hatred for the Americans” and destabilise the whole Middle East.

Meanwhile, samples collected by the UN chemical weapons inspection team in Syria will be transferred to laboratories today, according to a spokesperson for Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

MC Cain is still dreaming that the FSA can be salvaged from being phagocytosed by Al Qaeda. He wants to convince the Congress that, if they want to save the USA’s credibility and avoid a “catastrophy”, they have no choice than vote for a war against Syria. I wonder who are the dummies who’ll buy that argument, but the USA congress is full of surprises.

After meeting with Obama Monday, they both said they believed the White House is developing a strategy that would weaken the regime of President Bashar Assad and boost Syrian opposition forces – though they said Obama has more work to do to explain this plan.

“We still have significant concerns,” McCain said, “but we believe there is in formulation a strategy to upgrade the capabilities of the Free Syrian Army and to degrade the capabilities of Bashar Assad. Before this meeting, we had not had that indication.”

McCain of Arizona repeatedly said a congressional vote rejecting the use of military force would be “catastrophic” to U.S interests and would destroy the credibility of the nation in the eyes of both allies and adversaries.

Does France has also proofs of who was behind the Khan Al Assal chemical attacks? Then they should publish them or at least pass them over to the UN inspectors, that would save them a trip back to Syria.
Maybe France have them but prefer to hide them for good reasons

President Vladimir Putin hopes to send a delegation of Russian lawmakers to the United States to discuss the situation in Syria with members of Congress, the Interfax news agency reported Monday.

Russian legislators Valentina Matvienko and Sergei Naryshkin proposed that to Putin, saying polls have shown little support among Americans for armed intervention in Syria to punish President Bashar Assad’s regime for an alleged chemical weapons attack.

The lawmakers said maybe U.S. legislators can be persuaded to take a “balanced stance” on the issue. Putin supported the initiative, which would require formal approval by the Foreign Ministry.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov dismissed evidence of the alleged chemical weapons use by the Syrian regime as “absolutely unconvincing.”

He said the evidence presented by the U.S. to Moscow showed “there was nothing specific there, no geographic coordinates, no names, no proof that the tests were carried out by the professionals.” He did not describe the tests further.

In an interview with the French daily Le Figaro published Monday, Assad also questioned the evidence implicating his regime in chemical attacks, saying President Obama and French President Francois Hollande have been “incapable” of providing “a single piece of proof.”

Russia has sent legislators to the U.S. before to try to persuade Congress about pending legislation. But sending a delegation to Washington to discuss Syria’s civil war could be seen as a publicity stunt, given the strong positions Moscow already has taken as a key ally of Assad’s regime.

Putin said a dialogue between legislators of the two countries was an essential part of reviving Russian-American relations.

One of my recent ‘Theories’, can’t remember the #number, was titled ‘redlines’. About how Damascus (and important location in and around) was a redline for the regime for which it would be prepared to use chemical weapons to defend.

The english translation of the French dossier has been posted on AJE blog in four parts. Part 4 echoes my theory.

Our information confirms that the regime feared an attack of scale by the opposition in Damascus during this period. Our assessment is that the regime sought by this attack to loosen the grip (of the opposition) and secure strategic sites for control of the capital. For example, the district of Moadamiyé is located near the military airport of Mezzeh, which houses the air force’s intelligence services.

The prime minister, who met prominent lawmakers to discuss the crisis, said President Francois Hollande was “continuing efforts to forge a coalition as soon as possible,” to punish the Syrian regime for the attack.

But he added that “there is no question that France will act on its own.”

“It is up to the president to decide if a vote… should be held,” Ayrault said of the emergency parliamentary session. He said there would be no vote on Wednesday as in all probability no coalition would have been formed by then.

Is the Friends of Syria meeting announced for the 8th cancelled? It seems that ‘group’ that started with 30 countries, then dropped to 11 has been further reduced to 3 : Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar .

Italy insists that any military intervention in Syria must be sanctioned by the United Nations
AFP , Monday 2 Sep 2013

The Italian foreign ministry on Monday denied a news report that top officials from countries that support the Syrian opposition planned to meet in Rome on Sunday, saying no such meeting was scheduled.

“There will be no meeting of the Friends of Syria in Rome, not on Sunday or any other day,” a spokesman for the ministry told AFP. “We do not have any meetings scheduled for this group.”

Imagine if you may, Putin, with legendary dexterity, sharp, fast, and super intelligent responses, and thick, clumsy lump of shxt athad trying to push the buttons in sync. After several trials, one of the two will be slapped to a silly pulp, and it aint gonna be the KJB officer.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. military’s decision to move an aircraft carrier into the Red Sea to help out with any “contingencies” underscores concerns a strike on Syria could evolve into another costly war as U.S. defense spending faces massive, mandatory cuts.

Current and former military officials say the cost of firing cruise missiles at selected targets in Syria would be relatively easily absorbed, and analysts say the effect on U.S. weapons makers would be relatively minimal.

But some U.S. lawmakers worry a strike against Syria could trigger a broader conflict.

They are using that argument as another reason to avert more than $500 billion in military spending cuts facing the Pentagon over the next decade under the process known as “sequestration,” on top of $487 billion in cuts that were already planned.

“We cannot keep asking the military to perform mission after mission with sequestration and military cuts hanging over their heads,” Republican Buck McKeon, chairman of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, told CNN on Monday.

“The poison gas attack was probably carried out by the 4th division of Assad’s army. Experts and defectors agree that this is the only unit that possesses launching devices for chemical weapons. Immediately following the chemical attack, it shelled rebel positions with conventional artillery — but was unable to take a single location.

Instead, the division lost at least seven tanks in the Damascus neighborhood of Harasta alone. A rebel video provides an insight into the lack of personnel among the elite division: Two crew members flee a burning tank — but they are wearing no uniforms, no helmets and no radio gear. Shabiha militia members have apparently been forced to fill the gaps in the ranks of the army.”

The coward Assad’s thugs are hiding in universities and hospitals among civilians because they know the US is less likely to strike there while they never had any qualm bombarding civilians, hospitals and universities. Is cowardice in there genes?

Syrian military commanders are meanwhile continuing to redeploy forces away from sensitive sites ahead of a postponed US air strike that many in Damascus believe is still likely.

That’s according to residents of the Syrian capital, who said today that troops had moved into schools and universities, which officials calculate are unlikely to be hit if Barack Obama orders an attack following a congressional vote next Monday.

Martin Chulov, in Beirut, and Alec Luhn, in Moscow, report:

Damascenes reported more checkpoints than usual in regime-held areas, but said the capital continued to function as it had during the past two years of ever more entrenched war.

In rebel-held districts, where siege and deprivation have bitten deeper, locals claimed a sense of despair had descended after Obama’s speech.

“They were so close to doing something,” said Umm Latifa, the widowed head of a household of six children in east Damascus.

The best part of the article from Dar Spiegel was the discussion of the illusory turning point of the regime military advances after the fall of Qusair. The fact of the matter is the alleged turning point was just illusory hyped by the Assad media to improve its thugs failing morals. The regime was NOT winning and the war continued like before with only minor victories for both sides.

I quote:

Illusory Turning Point

Following this victory, many observers proclaimed that the regime had regained the upper hand. Government forces did in fact win battles in Homs, which has been largely reduced to rubble, and moderately gained ground in clashes around Damascus.

In view of the thousands of Shiite fighters who came from Iran, Iraq and Lebanon to Syria, it looked as if the conflict would remain deadlocked, a war of attrition with a great deal suffering and little progress for either side. Following the fall of Qusayr, the regime and its allies, the Hezbollah, even announced that they would march on Aleppo, Syria’s financial and commercial center in the north, which has been divided for the past year, with the rebels and government forces each controlling roughly half of the city.

But this alleged turning point in the war turned out to be illusory. The war continued just as it did during the preceding months: a protracted, brutal conflict — fighting district for district, position for position, hill for hill, with only minor victories for each side — although less often for Assad than for his opponents, such as the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

In July, rebels rapidly overwhelmed the small town of Khan al-Assal, located between Aleppo and Hama, and in early August they took control of the Minigh military airport. In mid-August, the rebels scored a decisive victory when they captured the town of Khan Assir, south of Aleppo. This closed off the last corridor to the regime’s troops in Aleppo, leaving them completely surrounded.

The rebels also seized control of villages and city districts in Daraa in the south, Deir al-Zor in the east and around Hama. Viewed from afar, these are slow-motion movements, miniscule advances and retreats. At stake are place names that no one in the West has ever heard of. In actual fact, though, the rebels are slowly but surely reducing the amount of territory controlled by the regime.

Nevertheless, the myth of a military turning point in the regime’s favor has persisted since June. This has also hampered the search for motives for the poison gas attack: Many observers wondered why Assad should use chemical weapons if he is winning the war already. In actual fact, the situation has been difficult for the regime’s troops for quite some time now. Since the spring of 2012, many of the army’s positions have only been supplied from the air because all land routes are under the control the rebels.

Read this and try to understand:
Ed Miliband has hardened his position over Syria by saying that Labour would only support military action against the Assad regime if Britain’s national security was threatened or al-Qaida and its affiliates gained possession of large stockpiles of chemical weapons.
( how would the uk’s national security be threatened if Syrians kill each other using CW?
That leaves one real scenario,the second related to alqaida, which practically means that the regime and the uk will be fighting the same enemy !! )

Assuming the U.S. Congress authorizes them, Washington (together with some allies) soon will launch military strikes against Syrian regime targets. If so, it will have taken such action for reasons largely divorced from the interests of the Syrian people.
…
Consequences almost certainly will be unpredictable. Still, several observations can be made about what it might and might not do:

A military attack will not, nor can it, be met with even minimal international consensus; in this sense, the attempt to come up with solid evidence of regime use of chemical weapons, however necessary, also is futile. Given the false pretenses that informed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and, since then, regional and international polarisation coupled with the dynamics of the Syrian conflict itself, proof put forward by the U.S. will be insufficient to sway disbelievers and skepticism will be widespread.
….
Military action, which the U.S. has stated will not aim at provoking the regime’s collapse, might not even have an enduring effect on the balance of power on the ground. Indeed, the regime could register a propaganda victory, claiming it had stood fast against the U.S. and rallying domestic and regional opinion around an anti-Western, anti-imperialist mantra.

Ultimately, the principal question regarding a possible military strike is whether diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict can be reenergized in its aftermath. Smart money says they will not: in the wake of an attack they condemn as illegal and illegitimate, the regime and its allies arguably will not be in a mood to negotiate with the U.S. Carefully calibrating the strike to hurt enough to change their calculations but not enough to prompt retaliation or impede diplomacy is appealing in theory. In practice, it almost certainly is not feasible.
Whether or not the U.S. chooses to launch a military offensive, its responsibility should be to try to optimize chances of a diplomatic breakthrough. This requires a two-fold effort lacking to date: developing a realistic compromise political offer as well as genuinely reaching out to both Russia and Iran in a manner capable of eliciting their interest – rather than investing in a prolonged conflict that has a seemingly bottomless capacity to escalate.
In this spirit, the U.S. should present – and Syria’s allies should seriously and constructively consider – a proposal based on the following elements:

It is imperative to end this war. The escalation, regional instability and international entanglement its persistence unavoidably stimulates serve nobody’s interest.
The only exit is political. That requires far-reaching concessions and a lowering of demands from all parties. The sole viable outcome is a compromise that protects the interests of all Syrian constituencies and reflects rather than alters the regional strategic balance;
The Syrian crisis presents an important opportunity to test whether the U.S. and the Islamic Republic of Iran can work together on regional issues to restore stability;
A viable political outcome in Syria cannot be one in which the current leadership remains indefinitely in power but, beyond that, the U.S. can be flexible with regards to timing and specific modalities;
The U.S. is keen to avoid collapse of the Syrian state and the resulting political vacuum. The goal should thus be a transition that builds on existing institutions rather than replaces them. This is true notably with respect to the army;
Priority must be given to ensuring that no component of Syrian society is targeted for retaliation, discrimination or marginalisation in the context of a negotiated settlement.

Such a proposal should then form the basis for renewed efforts by Lakhdar Brahimi, the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, and lead to rapid convening of a Geneva II conference.

Debate over a possible strike – its wisdom, preferred scope and legitimacy in the absence of UN Security Council approval – has obscured and distracted from what ought to be the overriding international preoccupation: how to revitalise the search for a political settlement. Discussions about its legality aside, any contemplated military action should be judged based on whether it advances that goal or further postpones it.

Tara.
That is very true, and the most important battle that the article have missed was the attack on the Syrian coast, that attack shook the Mafia regime to its core, because it exposed it to its main supporters that it could not protect them from few hundreds fighters and had to bomb and destroy their villages same as they did to Sunnis towns,when the rank and file of his core supporters started leaving Damascus to protect their town,the FSA in both Ghoutas were making advances, HA did all that it can to help them,the talk of an impending attack by the FSA on new fronts,all that forced them to use their last line of defense, chemical weapons. It is an abvoius sign that they were about to lose something very valube.

This did not receive enough attention in the media but Egypt’s opposition to a strike on Syria boosted by a similar position by alazhar is significant.
” Arabs objections did not surprise US, Egypt’s position did”
KSA was either fooled by Sisi or faisal al saud was simply spreading empty rhetoric.
Number wise, most Arabs are against a military strike on Syria, the support of Bedouins is not enough to say that ” Arab countries support a military attack”
الأعراب اشد كفرا و نفاقا
(صلع).

Even thought Obama is bending backward telling every one that it will be a limited attack, that it will not change the balance of power nor its aim to bring down the Mafia regime of Chemical Assad. Regime apologists are taking it as it is the end if the world. Because they know the regime is so broken being held together with a million stitches, any movement or shaking it will bring the whole regime down.
Apologists all of a sudden demand to let the UN investigate, while they know very well that the UN investigation of the assassination of Rafik Al Hariri has been ongoing since 2005 with no end insight, mind you that investigation was done with all the UNSC blessing,how many years do they estimate for this one to take with Russia and China on Chemical Assad’s side.

A French intelligence report on Monday alleged that the Syrian regime launched an attack on Aug. 21 that involved a “massive use of chemical agents” and could carry out similar strikes in the future.

The government, on its Web site, published a 9-page intelligence synopsis about Syria’s chemical weapons program that found that at least 281 deaths could be attributed to the attack in rebel-held areas outside Damascus. The analysis based that count in part on dozens of videos culled by French intelligence services.

Alan Grayson , a congressman from Florida, wants you to join him to petition the congress to vote NO on any resolution to strike Syria:

Petition: “The Administration is considering intervening in the Syrian civil war. We oppose this. There’s no vital national security involved. We are not the world’s policeman, nor its judge and jury. Our own needs in America are great, and they come first. The death of civilians is always regrettable, and civil war is regrettable, but no Americans have been attacked, and no American allies have been attacked. The British Parliament understandably has voted not to join in any attack. Notably, defense contractor Raytheon’s stock is up 20% in the last 60 days. It seems that nobody wants US intervention in Syria except the military-industrial complex. I oppose US military intervention in Syria. Join me.”
( we were told that both the Syrian regime and the Islamist rebels are bad, now they want us to support a strike that can only help alqaida and nusra terrorists)

“NATO’s secretary-general says he is convinced that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons and that the world must respond firmly, as divisions widened among U.S. lawmakers over whether to approve President Barack Obama’s plans to strike.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the NATO political chief, said it will be up to individual nations to decide how they will act – but some analysts saw his strong call for action as opening the door to a potential role for NATO, a 28-nation alliance that includes Canada.”

The limited strike is coming but the Syrian people should not tie all their hopes to it
The news on the ground are great.
The FSA have attacked the 3rd division that is responsible for protecting north Damascus in the Qalamoan area,controlled huge swath of land and gained lots of tanks and other weapons and the fighting is still ongoing
Quires airport in Aleppo is completely surrounded and about to be liberated any day now
Good advances in Hama and Damascus countryside.
The delay of Obama limited attack has its benefits, big defections is happening, there are unconfirmed reports of a high-ranking Alwaite officer defecting to Turkey with secret documents that will hurt the mafia regime.

http://youtu.be/tZ5mrm7dHP0?t=14s
The US stands virtually alone in the face of humanity with its self-righteous regard to bomb any one it wants to based on its own outrageous self-serving lies.
“I’m comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable,” said Obama.
Comfortable? With committing a war of aggression by launching hundreds of cruise missiles on a sovereign country that has not and does not threaten the US?
What Obama means by the UN Security Council being paralyzed is that it refuses to bend over backwards to satisfy Washington’s criminal bloodlust and state terror.

The American people are against any war in Syria, Congress is being called back into session but at this time if they took a vote now it would be a no to war in Syria. The US is making their case and incrementally presenting evidence hoping to sway the rest of the world to agree with them. In the meantime the UN said it would take 2 weeks to go through all the evidence. The President is leaving on Sep 5 for the G20 meeting. The President is buying time because Congress, the American people and the rest of the world are not convinced that Assad did the attack. He is using this time to build a case before the UN results.http://youtu.be/dnr8asRHgZo?t=5s

What is the message of this to the public in all Arab nations? Do US leaders really believe, that this “target practising” with Israel is seen as a “humanitarian effort” against chemical weapons. By the way Israel has besides nuclear weapons also chemical and bacteriological weapons. Like Syria Israel has not signed the Chemical Weapons Convention.

September to remember
The senate FR committee already voted 15 to three to arm vetted members of FSA,
While the senators agree that there is no good option,the inaction is far too dangerous,
In conclusion the senate will vote approving the strike,with over sixty vote,disapprove will be less than 32 vote

Senate vote will be before the house,and it will have effect on the house vote

U.S. officials say evidence shows the Syrian government used sarin gas, but there are doubters

Robert Butler, the former Australian ambassador to the UN and former UN chief weapons inspector in Iraq, joins “Consider This” host Antonio Mora to address lingering questions about last month’s alleged chemical attack near Damascus, Syria

…
There is a lesson contained in that success, and it is: “priorities, people.”

If you want to deal with Iran, deal with Iran. And if you want not to be drawn all the way into a Syrian civil war between factions none of them friendly to the United States, then the best way to avoid being drawn is: don’t take the first step. And if you have already inadvisedly taken the first step, at least beware the second, third and fourth.

The FSA: Any political solution will meet with failure, War is the only solution

Syrian opposition calls on int”l community to arm FSA
03/09/2013

ISTANBUL, Sept 3 (KUNA) — The National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces called Tuesday on the international community to arm the Free Syrian Army (FSA) in order to defend the Syrian people against Al-Assad forces.
A statement by the coalition called on world nations to take military measures against Al-Assad forces who are killing civilians.
The extreme use of force and chemical weapons against the Syrian people during the past 30 months was proof that any political resolution would meet failure, the coalition said.

If the Congress says Yes, Obama will stay in the history as the Nobel Peace holder that started a war that destroyed all hopes of peace in the Middle East.
This is why I think Obama is secretly wishing that the Congress say No. Despite the criticisms he would get, he could save his reputation as a man of peace and finally enforce a peace process in the region instead of the vicious circle of war.
If the Congress say No then the next step will be the Geneva II conference after Russia would offer the necessary guarantees to protect the chemical weapons stockpile which is finally the only reason the USA is considering strikes.

I agree with the opposition. There is no political solution to the crisis in Syria. Assad will not voluntarily step down. His supporters will follow him blindly to the Abyss. There will be no coup against him. Iran and its foot soldier HA will not stop propping him up. The Syrian people will not forget their dead.

All those who argue for political solution are either pretending or fooling themselves that it is possible. The strike should be aimed first to topple Batta and once he and his supporters are eliminated,, another strike should follow against ISIS and al Qaeda.

Since the start of the crisis in Syria, Obama has been pushed around by the Israeli lobby, Saudi Arabia lobby, Qatar lobby, Moslem Brotherhood, Turkey, France and the UK who wanted confrontation rather than negotiation.

Obama who, by nature is opposed to war, has never been able to have his warmonger team set up a clear strategy of peace. He did not feel he was forced to have one, as France, the UK, Qatar and Turkey were taking the lead. When these countries failed and brought the situation to a dangerous disaster, then they desperately wanted the US to take a leading role to help them solve the issue by force.

The alleged chemical attack came suspiciously at a very appropriate time to pull Obama in a situation where he had to do something more forceful than calling for Bashar al Assad to go.
Then he was trapped. More pressure came from the Israelis fearful of a chemical attack and from the Saudi Arabia and Qatar lobbies calling for ‘punishment’.
Pushed around, Obama wanted to escape bearing any responsibility in military action he had refused right from the start.
Unfortunately he has no plan B. Therefore he threw the ball to the Congress. ” I can’t take the decisions as it goes against my nature, let the American people take the responsibility of the decision they will make”
It is a justified escapism.
In the meantime, maybe he is finally working out a strategy of peace?

Krauthammer on Obama: ‘He doesn’t have a strategy’ on Syria
Published September 02, 2013

“Look this isn’t a sudden stroke of constitutionalism, this is simply expediency and delay,” he continued. “The problem is not that he’s not selling his strategy, it’s that he doesn’t have a strategy, and that’s the reason everybody left, right and center has no idea what he’s doing. He zig-zags left and right, he telegraphs he’s going to strike, he does nothing, he calls in the Congress and then he goes off and plays golf, when his secretary of state had given a speech a day before with remarkable urgency and passion.”

In the contrary, I think Obama wishes the Congress say NO to war, because that would mean a YES to negotiation. That has been the leitmotiv of the US administration for months , but they were not able to force it through because of the high resistance of the Saudi-Qatar-Turkey-France-UK lobbies. Finally the ‘chemical weapons’ attack was intended to kill that option.

A NO from the Congress will give a greenlight to Obama to “force” the Geneva conference on the two sides.
The only important thing he badly needs is a solid guarantee that the Syria government is prevented of eventually using chemical weapons. That is the thorniest issue and only Russia can contribute to solve it. Russia is surely motivated to step in to do that if it will prevent the strikes. It is now a race against time.

Peace will never come to the Middle East so long as there are dictatorships and radical Islamists. It is a deadly combination. During the first half of the 20th century, Europe was cursed with dictatorships and radical nationalism, which caused two major wars. What saved Europe at the end of the day WAS the United States. I am amazed how people always forget that. They also forget how the US saved Europe once again when they intervened on the behalf of the Muslims in both Bosnia and Kosovo. Please tell me, did Bosnia have oil?

In a sharp contrast to the United States position, India on Tuesday disfavoured any “military solution” to resolve the Syrian conflict and said it will prefer to await the full results of the United Nations probe into the Syrian government’s apparent use of chemical weapons that killed thousands of people.

Asking all sides to abjure violence and work for creation of conducive conditions for an inclusive political dialogue, India also supported the proposed ‘International Conference on Syria’ (Geneva-II) as being the best prospect for a political solution.

“India has consistently called upon all sides to abjure violence so that conditions can be created for an inclusive political dialogue leading to a comprehensive political solution, taking into account the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people. There can be no military solution to this conflict. We continue to support the proposed ‘International Conference on Syria’ (Geneva-II), being the best prospect for a political solution, for bringing the Syrian government and the opposition to the negotiating table,” the spokesperson in the Ministry of External Affairs said.

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources made this heads up available for your benefits.

The Turkish government along with its Saudi, Emirati and Jordanian counterparts are far far ahead of their Western partners in terms of preparations, resolution and the clarity of objective with regards to any upcoming military operations in Syria against Humanity Obscenity.

The Turkish government announced that it has all the necessary approvals from its Parliament to conduct military operations whether by land, air or sea against the regime of Obscenity. It further asserted that it sees the outcome of such operation to be nothing less than the removal of the obscene regime from Syria so that Syrians can enjoy regimes of decency afterwards. The government maintains that Turkish Armed Forces are in a state of complete readiness to cross the borders and begin the necessary cleansing operation that they appear to be tasked with.

On the other hand, the Arab partners of the coalition have all their military gear and armaments in place in various undisclosed locations not far away from the Syrian capital. They too are eager to move forward and do away with the current state of obscenity gripping over the Syrian landscape.

With all these nations willing, ready and eager to perform their duties in the military operation, it is doubtful that Mr. Obama will need further encouragements. Needless to say that these countries represent the undisputed leaders of the Arab and Muslim Worlds. If they decide to move forward, lesser powers will have no effect or say in the matter.

If Obama really wanted the war badly, he would have not bothered passing the decision to the Congress.

Obama’s public hesitation, playing golf and mumbling on TV are clear signs he doesn’t want war, but he wants to have the Congress supporgt and be in the strongest position to enforce peace through negotiations.

Zoo
Your analysis is twisted, the real reason Obama asked the congress to debate the strike ,is for future republican presidents will be under severe pressure to get congress approval,in future war decisions, Obama is ex senator,and so is Kerry and H.Clinton and Hagel,
And if the war escalated and he requires more strkes the president will be in more stronger position, it is a stronger message to Assad if the decision to strke is from both the executive and the legislative branches, it says US is united against Assad

Majed it is funny how you repeat anything you see on TV. The argument “the real reason Obama asked the congress to debate the strike ,is for future republican presidents will be under severe pressure to get congress approval,in future war decisions, Obama is ex senator,and so is Kerry and H.Clinton and Hagel” is the very same thing all American TV stations have on them.

The fact is you have no idea why Obama was restrained.

I say it is because of several reasons:

1.) his military commanders oppose it, starting with Dempsey
2.) the vote in the UK shocked him
3.) threat of impeachment
4.) fear of a wider war in the region
5.) realization Americans want nothing to do with war
6.) the fact that air strikes alone will not overturn the Syrian government and kill 10s of 1000s of Syrian civilians
7.) Iranian/Hezbollah involvement in a wider war (see #4)
8.) he has no real allies in the world
9.) Russia and China opposed
10.) no UN resolution making any action illegal

and a host of others. The fact he would be acting as the Al-Qaeda air force probably doesn’t bother him. He’s been allied with them for years.

Perhaps instead of Dr. Death we should call you Majed the Parrot because you repeat the American TV argument for us.

Egypt’s crackdown has also extended to the media. A court today ordered Al Jazeera’s affiliate in Egypt to stop broadcasting. The ban also extends to three other stations that have covered the protests, including one run by the Muslim Brotherhood. On Sunday, Egypt deported three Al Jazeera journalists after detaining them for five days.

Another heads up is now available for release by our well informed and highly reliable sources.

Just so you may know, the debate in the congress is currently centred around the form of approval that the congress is willing to approve rather than whether an operation must be approved or not.

Drafts are being prepared in order to address various issues raised by members of the Congress. We must also draw your attention to the important fact that some members of the Congress are calling for a tougher draft authorizing an operation with clearly defined objectives in lines with demands made by various coalition members as we described earlier than the one proposed by the W.H. administration.

Firstly, you seem to be avoiding a direct response to my comment and question.
Secondly, I am Hopeful not Hopeless. I am sure you didn’t mean that as a jab as I do not recall ever attacking you personally or turning a discussion into a personal attack.

Anthony Cordesman, a former senior defense official who’s now with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, took aim at the death toll discrepancies in an essay published Sunday.

He criticized Kerry as being “sandbagged into using an absurdly over-precise number” of 1,429, and noted that the number didn’t agree with either the British assessment of “at least 350 fatalities” or other Syrian opposition sources, namely the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which has confirmed 502 dead, including about 100 children and “tens” of rebel fighters, and has demanded that Kerry provide the names of the victims included in the U.S. tally.

“President Obama was then forced to round off the number at ‘well over 1,000 people’ – creating a mix of contradictions over the most basic facts,” Cordesman wrote. He added that the blunder was reminiscent of “the mistakes the U.S. made in preparing Secretary (Colin) Powell’s speech to the U.N. on Iraq in 2003.”
…
An unclassified version of a French intelligence report on Syria that was released Monday hardly cleared things up; France confirmed only 281 fatalities,

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources authorized the release of the following heads up.

Exercising his executive privileges by reminding the Congress that it was a courtesy call on his part to include the Congress in the making of his decision, and responding to pressure from Turkish and Arab partners who indicated that the state of readiness in which their armed forces are in must not be stretched too far into the future and must be utilized speedily, President Obama asked the Congress to speedily vote on his request for necessary military action against Obscene Head.

It remains to be seen if President Obama will take the extraordinary step of calling the Congress into session back from holidays in order to resolve the urgent matter.

What? Whatever happened to the brilliant analysis that the US staged his whole chemical attack thingie to launch a strike against Assad? I thought Obama wanted a war, or didn’t he? Maybe the neocons on his team did it to drag him into it without his knowledge? Or maybe it was those American Jews living the basement who plotted it?

I find it hopeless to discuss anything with you. From now on, I will ignore your questions as it is now clear from many of your ‘candid’ questions that you only want to hear the answers that you already have.
Play the game alone, then.

So John McCain says it would be catastrophic for Congress to not support President Obama’s plan for using military force against Syria…

“If the Congress were to reject a resolution like this, after the president of the United States has already committed to action, the consequences would be catastrophic, in that the credibility of this country with friends and adversaries alike would be shredded,” McCain told reporters. “And there would be not only implications for this president, but for future presidencies as well.”

…but that he might not vote for it anyway:

“I can’t support something that I’m afraid may be doomed to failure in the long run,” McCain said on NBC’s “Today” on Tuesday. “If this resolution does not do what we discussed with the president of the United States yesterday … then this resolution will not have the desired effect. […] it’s got to be a resolution that will achieve the goals that I just described, and if it doesn’t, than obviously then I can’t support it,” McCain said.

So I guess if Congress rejects President Obama’s request for authorization to attack Syria this will be the reason given by many Republicans: That his request just didn’t go far enough.

Majed come on – name the current US military brass members who have gone on record advocating war, or a strike, on Syria. Did you read that in some Muslim Brotherhood news organ? Did some poor slob on CNN say it? Israel?

Obama is turning out to be a great strategist for peace. By presenting to the Congress a military plan with ‘limited’ goals, he is ensuring it will not be voted by the republicans hardliners who follow McCain.
If the vote is NO, he will be asked to make his own decision. I doubt he will opt for military strikes without the guarantee that they will immediately be followed or replaced by the Geneva Conference announcement.
That’s seem to be Obama’s secret strategy.

Saudi Arabia seems increasingly worried that the vote at the Congress will turn out to be a loose-loose situation.
In both cases there will never be the all out war to dislodge Bashar al Assad that they have been forcefully pushing for.

Saudi Cabinet Calls for Strong International Response to Help the Syrian People

WASHINGTON, Sept. 3, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Saudi Arabia on Monday called for a strong and serious international stand to stop the massacre of people in Syria by Bashar Assad’s regime.

“The international community must assume its responsibilities by taking deterrent measures to put an end to violations and the crimes of genocide carried out by the Syrian regime over the past two years,” the Cabinet said.

The Cabinet meeting, chaired by Crown Prince Salman, said any opposition to international action would only encourage the regime to continue its crimes and use of weapons of mass destruction.

“The Cabinet renewed the Kingdom’s position to stand wholeheartedly with the will of the Syrian people and their leadership represented by the national coalition,” said Minister of Culture and Information Dr. Abdulaziz Khojah.

Obama stressed that the military plan developed by the Pentagon is “limited” and does not involve “boots on the ground” as in Iraq or Afghanistan. “It gives us the ability to degrade Assad’s capabilities when it comes to chemical weapons” now and in the future, he said.
…
The flurry of activity follows signals from the administration Monday that it would be willing to rewrite a proposed resolution authorizing military action against Syria to clarify that any operation would be limited in scope and duration and would not include the use of ground troops.

Peace will never come to the Middle East so long as there are dictatorships and radical Islamists. It is a deadly combination. During the first half of the 20th century, Europe was cursed with dictatorships and radical nationalism, which caused two major wars. What saved Europe at the end of the day WAS the United States. I am amazed how people always forget that. They also forget how the US saved Europe once again when they intervened on the behalf of the Muslims in both Bosnia and Kosovo. Please tell me, did Bosnia have oil?

Hmmm USA saved Europe? Militarily it was Soviet Union which defeated Germany and got then halve of Europe as a reward. Europe (- Soviet Union) in the 30’s had radical nationalism and dictatorship in rather few countries and most of them were born because of economical turmoil or the legacy of WW1. Like Germany. USA taking credit for “saving” Europe is watching history through Hollywood polaroid glasses. Well USA saved Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, Honduras, Nicaragua, Indonesia etc (a long, long list). USA has assassinated and overthrown more democratic leaders than any other nation.

We Europeans could also ask would Bosnia and Kosovo developed less to such open wounds with smaller US and Nato intrusions. During Yugoslavia time people of the region could live rather good in one country. The ethnic cleansing process in Balkan was “encouraged” by outside forces just like now in Syria (and Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and …).

Do you Hopeful know what is Camp Bondsteel? A giant torture and prison camp in middle of South Europe in Kosovo. USA’s reward for establishing Kosovo…

Peace will never come to the Middle East so long as there are dictatorships and radical Islamists.

Well why is USA then supporting Saudi Arabia and Gulf States? Do you think Riyadh is full of devoted secular democrats in power. In Syria US is trying to overthrow using radical Islamists. Makes no sense Hopeful. You nick name is obviously not based on the real nature of USA’s foreign policy. Hopeless would be a better describing nickname …

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly reliable sources authorized the release of the following VERY IMPORTANT heads up.

German Intelligence following in the footsteps of their French counterpart revealed startling evidence leaving zero doubts with regards to Assad’s direct involvement in the Aug. 21 crime against humanity committed in the Ghouta of Damascus.

The Germans revealed a phone call conversation between an Iranian ambassador and a high ranking member of the Lebanese (or more correctly Iranian) Hezbollah organization of terrorists. The phone call was intercepted by the Germans, and in it the Hezbollah member tells the Iranian ambassador the following ad-verbatim: Assad has lost his nerves and made a fatal error by giving orders to carry out the chemical attack.

With this mountain of evidence piling up corroborated by independent sources, it is now absolutely not conceivable for the US Congress not to positively respond to Obama’s call.

Further, the new German evidence clearly indicates that the fake façade of so-called solidarity among the axis of Middle Eastern evil is cracking, and also that the Irano-Hezbollah so-called might is nothing but a charade of empty posturing of a conceited rooster ready to be led away for slaughter that will wither away into deafening silence at the first sight of Western, Turkish and Arab Air Forces hovering over the Syrian horizons.

MIT professor Noam Chomsky has warned that an attack on Syria without United Nations support would be a war crime.

“As international support for Obama’s decision to attack Syria has collapsed, along with the credibility of government claims, the administration has fallen back on a standard pretext for war crimes when all else fails: the credibility of the threats of the self-designated policeman of the world,” Chomsky told The Huffington Post in an article published Monday.

He added that a U.S. strike against Syria without approval from the United Nations would be a “very serious” war crime.

Chomsky said in July that supplying the Syrian rebels with arms would not ultimately resolve the civil war. He advocated for international negotiations.

“This step would most likely produce an escalation of the military conflict and open the door to further military upgrading and expansion on the part of the regime, leading to increased destruction and the regime staying in place for longer,” he told the Middle East Office of the Heinrich Boell Foundation. “The second approach is to go to Geneva with the cooperation of the major powers, including Russia, and force the regime to accept a truce. These are the options we have.”

The Assad regime prepared for a U.S. military attack on the capital, urging civilian evacuations, moving soldiers into vacant apartments and issuing new threats of retaliation.

…
The Syrian government warned residents to move away from military bases outside Damascus, as troops began to position themselves for what appeared to be the first time in residential neighborhoods in the city that are home to military and security installations and government offices.

Residents of the town of Mouadhamiyat al-Qalamoun, north of Damascus, said the military asked them to evacuate on Sunday the vicinity of a major base in the area likely to be targeted by any U.S. strikes.

Our well informed and highly reliable sources just authorized the release of the following very important BREAKING NEWS heads up

John Boehner, a Republican, and current speaker of the US Congress just announced that the US Congress WILL SUPPORT Obama’s request for military action against the Syrian regime of B. Al-Assad for committing the latest crimes against humanity and using banned CW’s.

I would very much welcome an open discussion and debate, but I am not interested in personal attacks. I do not understand why you had to end your post with a personal attack comment. I did enjoy reading your opening remarks as obviously you know your history and are well-read.

From your obviously anti-amercian point of view, why did the US intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo on behalf of the minority Muslims there?

I would never claim that the US does not make tons of mistakes when driven by its self-serving national Interest only. But I do not subscribe to the cynical argument that the US is an evil force in the world. I actually believe that, on an aggregate, as a superpower, the US has done more good than harm than any other superpower in history. I bet more than 50% of the commentators on this forum do live in the US, Why did they choose that? Because it is evil?

When China becomes the superpower, which will happen soon, the world will be yearning for the time when the US was the superpower.

The easiest way to compare who “saved” Europe in WWII is to Compare East to West Germany and the economic, production and social prowess of either side that is still evident today.

Communism is a failed ideology as it rewards lazy people at the expense of the hard working folk. Democracy might not be a perfect governance system however it is far superior than anything else today.

I still the think that Obama will bomb but try to make it a limited strike and have an understanding with Russia that he just wants to ” deliver a message”, however there is always a risk with every foreign attack and that risk, namely igniting a larger war, Assad in my opinion will only respond if he thinks he can gain from a wider war or if he thinks his regime is in danger.

I personally think the game is over. Supporters should lay down their arms and ask for reconciliation and forgiveness. This would be their best way out to avoid humiliation, revenge and excommunication.

This BREAKING-NEWS heads up which is now authorized for release should act as an additional sobering call for the hallucinating supporters of criminal Ass-Head whizzing like bees on this site.

Just so you may know, Von Rassmussen, Chief of NATO, just announced that any attack on Turkey will bring the full NATO chorus into the theatre of operation.

This is a clear indication of Turkey’s expected lead role in the upcoming military strike against criminal Ass-Head. Turkey was looking for NATO’s cover. Now it has it. Roll down the Syrian coast Erdo.

Chill, despair and deafening silence were the modus operandi within the axis of evil camp following the announcement.

Investing more public money in preschool access for 4-year-olds is akin to improving the nation’s national security, according to a report released Tuesday by Mission: Readiness, an organization of retired admirals and generals.

I do not think that Bashar, and many of the people within the circle around him will ever lay down their arms. Not because they are brave, but because they are delusional. His end will be similar to Nicolae Ceausescu’s, who, till the last minute before his execution, believed that the revolutionaries were traitors. Dictators never seem to learn the lessons of history:

Just so you may know, our well informed and highly placed sources have authorized the release of yet another BREAKING-NEWS-Heads up.

A bipartisan consensus is forming within the Senate and the Congress about the urgent need to support Mr. Obama’s call to take military action against criminal al-Assad in concert with willing partners.

After Boehner’s endorsement, another Republican, Chairman Royce of the Foreign Relations Committee just issued a statement declaring military action against Al-Assad is in the HIGHEST INTERESTS of the United States.

Those Syrians who support US military strike probably are fully aware of the objective of US administration: A warning and a show of military and political dominance to Iran. Yet, they either ignore it or they do not care.

Simply put, US is doing it for Israel. When US says “The military strike against Syria is important to the security of the Middle East and to the security of the world”

You got the message loud and clear.

If the strike does happen, it will be sad and devastating to see Syria soon will become a victim because US needs to convey a strong message to Iran.

In the end, Syria civil war will get even bloodier and destructive. The whole region will be ablaze as well.

We have more important thing to do here: We are hoping we can save Syria and her people including your ignorant village fighters who have been fighting for manipulators including you and other Syrian expats who are comfortably living in US and other “developed” countries.

As for forgiveness from a backward sectarian fanatic like you, it would an insult to me. So save it for yourself as you might need it soon.

For a country to be able to fight external enemies, that country has to be strong from within.

Dictatorships that preside over political suppression, economic corruption and sectarian divisions can never dream of having strong nations.

The US and Iran will use Syria to send messages to each other because Syria is weak. Syria is weak because it is divided. It is divided because of the corrupt, inept and brutal regime that ruled it for 50 years.

The mere existence of someone who sees a pile of slaughtered children and call it “hardly a massacre” is an insult to humanity. I agree with MK, I believe people like you should not be forgiven and should be tried.

First one is as you said, Obama has made an agreement with Russia ( and Iran)that the attack will be limited to be a “deterrence against using chemical weapons”. It will be supported by a huge propaganda making it sound like the end of the regime. Maybe the USA expects that ‘humiliated’ Bashar al Assad will resign, but I seriously doubt he will, quite the contrary he will be boosted as a proud hero.

Then surprise.. surprise.. the opposition will be asked to get ready for Geneva II planned in October.

Second is that Obama is lying as he has used the week to set the first step of an all out war to unseat Bashar al Assad by force, while ensuring that Al Qaeda troops get a heavy beating too.
Then surprise.. surprise.. the opposition will be ask to get ready for Geneva II planned in November.

Baku-APA. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that the use of force is only legal when it is in self-defense or with UN Security Council authorization, remarks that appear to question the legality of US plans to strike Syria without UN backing, APA reports quoting Turkish media.
He said that if UN inspectors confirm the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the Security Council, which has long been deadlocked on the 2-1/2-year Syrian civil war, should overcome its differences and take action.

“If confirmed, any use of chemical weapons by anyone under any circumstances will be a serious violation of international law and outrageous war crime,” he told reporters. “Any perpetrators must be brought to justice. There should be no impunity.”

I continue to puzzle over the deep murkiness of ‘the case for rebel guilt’ regarding the August 21st chemical weapons attacks.

It is to be expected that Assadist agents and demented warmongers will simply wave away any and all evidence of regime complicity. Most published take the stance of the lugubrious Lavrov: deny, deny, deny. Others on the team simply whip up confections of doubt and misdirection.

But as of yet, there is no coherent body of evidence presented by those who claim the regime is entirely and utterly innocent.

Think about it; those who assume the ‘rebel’ side hit all the separate targets in the dead of night — all are unable to construct a story to match the declassified intelligence of the UK, USA and France.

Lavrov, Putin, Assad and regime trumpets say “show me the evidence” or “open your secret files” or “nonsense” or “why would the regime do such a thing?”

But on the side of regime there is no detailed alternative story of just how the rebels are supposed to have committed the large-scale atrocities.

One might wonder about Russian surveillance and spying capacities: have they no internal information to support their version of events?

Perhaps some poor Baathist functionary is in charge of declassifying and publishing the Syrian intelligence file that shows ‘rebel’ responsibility.

But we haven’t seen or heard anything beyond crude rhetoric and hand-waving. Just as we have absolutely no detailed explanation from the regime cheerleaders here. No timeline, no hint of actual delivery system used, no radio intercepts, no ‘defectors’ willing to identify themselves, no radar records, no witnesses, no accounting for events …

I expect even the regimists, in their heart of hearts, are wondering why zero credible evidence of ‘rebel’ complicity has come to light.

It is the dog that did not bark, I think. A significant omission.

North Americans (as most of us here would admit to being) live under the Anglo-Saxon legal regime, wherein an impartial judge supervises two adversaries who present evidence, testimony and counterevidence. European practice is more likely to be supervised by investigating magistrates, who actively demand evidence, and who are involved in questioning.

Despite the differences, consider oneself in the role of investigator/judge over the evidences adduced in this case. Whether as investigating magistrate or supervenor, there is a large body of evidence on the bench before us to support regime culpability.

From the regime advocates’ table, yet nothing credible to fully account for events.

Even those whose brains are partially eaten away by enthusiasm for Assad or infected by conspiratorial delusions can see what is before them.

But yet all we hear is obfuscation, denials, wishful thinking and misinformation.

Even at the top of the pyramid of Syrian justice, he who knows all things, knows nothing, hears nothing, has nothing to offer on his own behalf, despite the script and the open platform:

LE FIGARO – Can you prove to us that your army did not use chemical weapons on 21 August in the Damascus suburb, during attacks that killed more than a thousand people, as you are accused of by Barack Obama and Francois Hollande?

Bachar el-Assad – It is for those who are making the accusations to provide the proof. We have challenged the United States and France to put forward a single proof. Obama and Hollande have been unable to do so, even to their own people. (…)? I’m not at all suggesting that the Syrian army does or does not possess such weapons. Let’s suppose that our army wishes to use WMD: is it really going to do so in an area where it is actually present and where soldiers have been wounded by these weapons, as the UN inspectors found during their visit to the hospital where they were being treated? Where is the logic in that?

At #335. HOPEFUL said:

I bet more than 50% of the commentators on this forum do live in the US, Why did they choose that? Because it is evil?

The vast majority of the non-cheerleaders have easily related where they are from, and where they are (eg, Tara, Sami, Ghufran, etc — as well as many departed commentators) and why, and it is indeed North America they confirm as their residence. The screechiest of the pom-pom dudes, on the other hand, are too afraid to admit the obvious. Quite a telling little detail. Another dog that did not bark.

Why have France and the UK been doing all they could to prevent the UN chemical team to investigate Khan Al Assal?

What happened in Khan al Assal that they don’t want the public to know?

Is it accidental that once the UN team were ready to go to Khan al Assal, another “chemical attack” happened to divert ‘urgently’ the team away from Khan Al Assal?

I think France and the UK knew very well that the rebels used sarin in Khan al Assal and that they wanted to avoid it to be made public.
I am convinced that the arranged attack Al Ghuta was to prevent the UN team to reveal the horrors that the rebels did.
The argument to go to war looks to me as fabricated as the Iraq arguments for the war. The depressing part is that the USA has not taken a lesson and is falling into the trap again , unless they are the ones who have participated in building the case to weaken once for all Israel’s enemies, Syria, HA, Iran.

WASHINGTON – President Obama doesn’t only have to persuade Congress on military intervention in Syria. New polling shows the American public is highly skeptical of the administration’s plan for limited missile strikes in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

Fifty-nine percent of Americans oppose unilateral U.S. military action, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released Tuesday soon after Pew Research found that opponents of a strike outnumber supporters, 48% to 29%.

The divide tightens when Americans are asked about missile strikes conducted in conjunction with allied nations, with 51% in opposition and 46% in favor, according to the ABC News/Washington Post poll.

Americans are even more opposed to providing weapons to rebel forces in Syria, with 70% siding against a step that President Obama has already decided to take, according to Pew.

Apple Mini
You said
So save it for yourself as you might need it soon.
We will see who needs it in the future, we will pursue you, chase you where ever you hide, in sewage tube , in a hole underground we will find you you must face humanity court and then you will be begging crying for help and you will regret every hateful statement you made

Secretary of State John Kerry spoke out Tuesday against a proposed congressional prohibition on the use of American ground forces in Syria, saying the war-torn country could “implode” and that, if so, U.S. troops would be needed to prevent chemical weapons from falling into the hands of terrorist groups.

Mini apple
We are not backward fanatics, we call for justice , dignity, for freedom and democracy, you and Assad thugs are fanatic and criminal backward people.criminal brutal anti people thugs,who do not know what the word freedom means,still living in middle dark ages.

BTW Revenir
General Dempsy just made it clear he supports military force

and this is not civil war ,it is sectarian war ,HA thugs Iraqi Militia and the barbaian Persian soldiers fighting with Assad are not Syrian, Assad initiated this sectarian war we have no choice

Published on Sep 3, 2013
This footage from May and June 2013 shows battalions from the “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) declaring their unification with al-Qaeda’s Jabhat al-Nusra (Nusra Front) in the eastern Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta and in Aleppo, both strongholds of the anti-government militants. Although some instances have occurred where clashes between the two groups have taken place, for the most part, the FSA and al-Qaeda unite under the banner of Islamic monotheism.

He did it. Was it brashness? Perhaps he was letting the side down and felt the burden and pressure. After all he is the main man in the regime. He is responsible for Damascus’ security. With the regime advancing in al Qusayr and Homs, he wasn’t getting results in Damascus. His reputation was at stake. Frustration must have been high.

Did he go for it? Perhaps he thought the world was (and would be) busy with the escalating Egyptian situation and wouldn’t focus much on a ‘disputed’ and unclear event?

Perhaps as the french dossier suggests, he was fearing a significant rebel move on the capital.

ISTANBUL: The Syrian opposition said it feared a fresh chemical attack by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, after three convoys believed to be filled with chemical weapons were spotted.

“We have had recent information that there were three convoys loaded with chemical weapons (that) left their locations and now we can confirm that two of them have reached their final destination,” opposition spokesman Khaled Saleh told a press conference in Istanbul.

Since the weekend, two convoys reached Ezra’a, near to the southern city of Deraa, and the Dommair military airport on the outskirts of Damascus, Saleh said.

“We have very serious concerns, based on information that we received from sources inside Assad’s army, that they might be considering using those chemical weapons against innocent civilians,” he said.

“We have someone in Damascus who is willing to use chemical weapons at any cost, unfortunately the message that he has been receiving from the international community until now is a green light.

It was interesting to watch how Jaafari could not stand an argument with a smart woman. He was utterly humiliated. Not only that, but he was scared too. This was the first time admitting wrongdoings and injustices have occurred in Syria.

I am sure he sleeps at night eyes wide shut, for he genuinely lacks what it takes otherwise.

From which country he is going eventually to face his creator? Persia?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The influential pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC urged U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday to approve a resolution allowing the Obama administration to retaliate for chemical weapons use in Syria.

“AIPAC urges Congress to grant the president the authority he has requested to protect America’s national security interests and dissuade the Syrian regime’s further use of unconventional weapons,” AIPAC said in a letter to members of Congress obtained by Reuters.

Not long ago, when the regime ‘victories’ had dried up and momentum was turning the oppositions way, I predicted that soon the regime/allies internal blame game an finger pointing would begin when things start to go wrong.

DAMASCUSROSE, tells us the Republican Guards and others are furious at Maher Assad. Furious they are about to be hit due to Maher’s wrecklessness. Though for now they maintain a show of unity in the face of imminent US military strikes.

Rose also mentioned the mysterious death of an officer, and suggested it may have been related to the chemical attacks and the fallout (aftermath).

Then we have Mr Rafsanjani with his comments.

We may well see much more public signs of tension amongst the regime camp.

Remember that Ma fiosoquote from John Follains book? The dogs will soon tear each other apart.

A joint operations room was established between Russia, Iran, Damascus and Hezbollah.
The Russians mobilized their ships in the Mediterranean coast, the Iranians declared a mobilization of their naval, air and land, while the Syrian army has been on alert all the forces hitherto kept in reserve.
The Russians and Iranians subsequently informed the Americans that in their eyes, there is no limited and targeted military operation and that any attack will result in a total response to the Strait of Hormuz and that of Bab el-Mendab.
The Iranians have also suggested that the response will not be limited to Syria, but could reach other targets in the region. Friday and Saturday, the Russians and the Iranians have continued to raise the tone to show that they are ready for anything and finally, the U.S. President Barak Obama retracted his decision submitting it for approval to U.S. lawmakers, after the defection of the British.
….

Today, the bets are open. In the camp hostile to the Syrian regime, they are convinced that the U.S. strikes are only postponed, since according to the U.S. president himself, the decision was taken.
But in the other side, it is believed instead that the message has been received and that the United States has abandoned the project. In reality, there is no reason why the Iranians and Russians change their minds because they have rejected all the proposals made ​​to them by the Americans, directly through emissaries or indirectly through mediators.
So it is needed to open serious negotiations, through the summit in St. Petersburg on Thursday and Friday, or in the context of parallel contacts to the General Assembly of the United Nations, which the Iranian president has also attend . Otherwise, the standoff will continue, with more deaths and tragedies, at least in the foreseeable future …

Just so you may know, our well-informed, highly reliable and very highly placed sponsors again released the following breaking-news heads up.

After Boehner’s endorsement of Mr. Obama’s call to obliterate criminal B. Al-Assad abilities to commit further crimes against Syrians, Boehner’s deputy, Eric Cantor, another Republican, made his strong endorsement of Obama for military actions against the criminal.

The support for Mr. Obama’s call may turn out to be massive and unprecedented in the history of US politics

The army retook control of a strategic town in northwest Syria on Tuesday after 10 days of intense bombing and clashes, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

“Armed forces, backed by paramilitary soldiers, retook Ariha after 10 days of shelling” of the town, which on August 24 fell to fighters from rebel factions including the Islamist group Al-Nusra Front, it said.

Observatory head Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP that the town in Idlib province had been virtually emptied of its residents and armed forces and pro-regime militias were currently on a looting spree.

Ariha was of “strategic importance” as it is located on the main road linking the large town of Idlib to the coastal city of Latakia, Abdel Rahman said.

“The regime managed to retake the town in ten days,” he said. “The town was hit last week by air raids and artillery fire, and on the ground, violent clashes opposed the army and paramilitary forces against rebel armies.”

The army was on Tuesday also bombing Jabal Arbain, a mountain near Ariha, to try and retake control there, the Observatory said.

Armed forces control the majority of Idlib town, while rebel fighters exert power on large parts of the province of the same name.

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Sept. 3 (UPI) — Western intelligence services have made much of Hezbollah’s military support for the embattled Damascus regime in Syria’s civil war, but there’s another, less well-known threat emerging there.

That’s the growing force of Iraqi Shiite fighters who’re also fighting to keep Syrian President Bashar Assad in power.

Many of them were trained by Hezbollah and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps to fight the Americans in Iraq, and now form a major element in Iran’s new “foreign legion,” intelligence officers and military experts say.

A study by Matthew Levitt and Aaron Y. Zein of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that Hezbollah of Lebanon, Iran’s most powerful ally in the Arab world, is “establishing local proxies in Syria … through which it can maintain influence and conduct operations to undermine stability in the country in the future.”
…
Some of these have contributed fighters to the Syrian regime’s National Defense Force, a supposedly 50,000-strong militia force of Iraqi Shiites and members of Syria’s minority Alawite sect that dominates the Damascus regime. The NDF has become a key assault force with Assad’s security apparatus.

Arab shiaa should come to the understanding that Iran is using their creed to advance its hegemonic agenda in the middle east. Iran is using Arab shiaa as the cannon fodder for this agenda. I do not believe the Mullahs could care less about Islam, Shiism, or Ali and company. Time to wake up now. Continuing their coma will be extremely detrimental to their Arabhood and citizenship status. A day might come when Shiaa Arab are looked at as inherently traitors.

Had to share this from Bashar Ja’afari interview with Christiane Amanpour. Didn’t know that Bashar and his boss Bashar looked up to Obama for inspiration for change. Also, didn’t realize that he was such a sweet and gentle soul. As they say in Syria, “a cat can eat his dinner” (idiom).

“We are not war mongers. We are not war advocates. We are a peaceful nation, a small nation, and we don’t pretend to be equally strong enough to confront the United States military.”

“All what we are saying is that yes, we do have a domestic crisis,” Jaafari said. “Yes, wrongdoings happened in the past. Yes, injustices took place in Syria in the past. We need to correct this, and we believe in what Obama said in the elections. ‘Change: Yes we can.’”

Ok we deal with this matter as the attack is definitely happening. The spirit of SAA and Shabaheeha of national supportive army is really high and they’re ready to sacrifice their souls for the country.

The extra two weeks window given by Obama till he gets the approval from the congress was mainly a fulfillment to a request from Damascus to complete the job of hiding/shuffling weapons and troops (thanks to Russia and Iran for doing the liaison).

The agreement is very simple, Obama will be allowed to bombard a strict short list of empty and isolated military bases out of Damascus and in return there will be no big scale response from our side.

If Obama chooses to play with fire and attack any other target or to attack Damascus then, as Rev said, thousands of rockets will shower Israel with non stop till HA reaches Safad and Haifa and SAA liberates back all Tabariya lake (the Sea of Galilee).

Hamas will happily support Syria directly and open the Southern flank as a token of appreciation and evidence of coming back to the nest of resistance.

Iran will not intervene directly on this coming up round but to have a continuous airlift supply in addition the one on ground through Iraq, it’ll only intervene full scale if any enemy put a foot on Syrian land.

Russia will not intervene directly on this coming up round as well but to offer all its early missile attack warning systems to protect Syria and pass coordinates to Damascus.

• Support for military action on Syria appears strong in the Senate, judging from the foreign relations committee hearing just concluded. Senator after senator opened his or her remarks with a call for action. Secretary of state John Kerry answered a lion’s share of the questions.

“• General Dempsey said there were four Russian warships in the eastern Mediterranean but they were keeping a “respectful distance” and he considers them a non-issue. Kerry called for calm. “It’s important for us not to get into an unnecessary struggle with the Russians,” he said.”

The congress will support an attack, that will denigrate Assad thugs to kill SyrianAssad missiles and aircrafts will be destroyed FSA will be stronger,
Kerry said also that more help will be given to the FSA

Persia is too coward to do anything, HA is hiding in every hole they can find, Assad will be forced to rethink his strategy,if he uses CW again he must be stupid

“Arab shiaa should come to the understanding that Iran is using their creed to advance its hegemonic agenda in the middle east. Iran is using Arab shiaa as the cannon fodder for this agenda. I do not believe the Mullahs could care less about Islam, Shiism, or Ali and company. Time to wake up now. Continuing their coma will be extremely detrimental to their Arabhood and citizenship status. A day might come when Shiaa Arab are looked at as inherently traitors.”

Tara are you drinking this early? is it happy hours?

What Arabhood? You are a Turk ethnically and coming to give the Shia lessons about Arabhood. Please stop writing when you are drunk.

AS for Iran’s Agenda, I want someone to explain this to me. I know when al-Khomeini was in power his agenda was to topple all of those despotic kings and princes of the Gulf and he wanted to fight Israel. But, what is the Iranian Agenda now? I really want to hear it from someone, because I think the Iranians are lost now and want a way out of al-Khomeini’s ideas.

I doubt Syria or its allies will retaliate immediately. It will absorb the shock but it may rebound in a surprising way. When and how that’s the question. This attack will never be forgiven nor forgotten.

Susan Rice: ‘Very Limited Risk’ of Escalation If Syria Attacked

Syria and Iran have threatened to strike U.S. ally Israel and American interests in the region if the United States carries through with its threat of limited missile strikes.

But Rice suggested those threats were mere bluster.

“They know that the United States will stand up for our own national security, our own defense, and that of our partners and friends in the region. So it’s not in their interest to escalate,” she said.

“Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader, or Guardian Jurist, of Iran, will realize his dream of delivering his sermon from the pulpit of Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, announcing the attainment of Islamic unity he has long promised.
He will then pompously step down from the pulpit to stroke the forehead of a wheelchair-bound Damascene boy, signaling that forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.
He will then stand next to a group of Syrian Sunni ulema wearing white turbans. There are lots of them, in the mold of Mufti Ahmad Hassoun, ready to oblige.
He will shake and raise their hands as camera clicks and flashlights capture the historic moment.
The Guardian Jurist will promise that his next prayer – or his successor’s, if he is sufficiently humble – will be in Jerusalem.
But he won’t mention the Golan…..”

The expanding Shiite Crescent
Sunday, 16 June 2013

Jamal Khashoggi

When the term “Shiite Crescent” was coined a few years back, it was meant to warn of Iranian expansionism across the Levant.
Nowadays, after the Big Powers’ defeat in the Qusayr battle, Shiite fundamentalism is basking in all the glory of triumph.
With the resulting enlistment of hundreds of Iraqi Shiite volunteers in the war overtly championed by Iran, the Crescent is liable to evolve into a political axis stretching from Tehran to Beirut via Baghdad and Damascus.

The Iranian Oil Ministry will pull out old maps from its drawers to build the pipeline to pump Iranian oil and gas from Abadan (across Iraq) to Tartus.
The Iranian Ministry of Roads and Transportation will dust off the national railways authority’s blueprints for a new branch line from Tehran to Damascus, and possibly Beirut.
Why not? The wind is blowing in their favor and I am not making a mountain out of a molehill.

Years in the making
Tehran has been mulling over such projects for years without actually starting them.
But she will, once she settles the Syria war in her favor. It is only natural for her to consolidate victory on the ground by blending her triumphant axis in a singular political, economic and military network.
Gulf unity plans have dissipated. Some Gulf countries are keen to flatter Iran so as to preserve a modicum of their national sovereignty

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader, or Guardian Jurist, of Iran, will realize his dream of delivering his sermon from the pulpit of Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, announcing the attainment of Islamic unity he has long promised.
He will then pompously step down from the pulpit to stroke the forehead of a wheelchair-bound Damascene boy, signaling that forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.
He will then stand next to a group of Syrian Sunni ulema wearing white turbans. There are lots of them, in the mold of Mufti Ahmad Hassoun, ready to oblige.
He will shake and raise their hands as camera clicks and flashlights capture the historic moment.
The Guardian Jurist will promise that his next prayer – or his successor’s, if he is sufficiently humble – will be in Jerusalem.
But he won’t mention the Golan. He knows the Russians are now the key component of the U.N. monitoring force separating Israeli and Syrian forces on the Heights.
Because Takfiris are still mounting desperate operations here and there, he realizes that Syrian troops and Hezbollah fighters are busy keeping the peace in predominantly Sunni cities, towns and townships.
In that afternoon, a huge reception will be held in a newly rehabilitated Damascus palace still showing the scars of war to mark the signing of a mutual defense pact by the presidents of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.
The Guardian Jurist will stand wreathed in smiles in the background, perhaps in awe at the likely appearance of the Hidden Imam to bless the agreement.

The view from Saudi Arabia
We turn southward to Riyadh and find the capital calm and dusty but concerned the battle was settled in favor of Bashar al-Assad and his partners.
Riyadh is conscious that the clean sweep is not Bashar’s but that of Iran and the old Khomeini scheme.
Bashar becomes the representative of Vilayet-e-faqih in Damascus.
Riyadh is also alarmed by Iranian activity in its surrounding area.
It fears for Bahrain. The Houthis have won uncontested control of more than half the old North Yemen. South Yemen, Saudi Arabia’s traditional ally, is being gradually eaten away by Iran.
Gulf unity plans have dissipated. Some Gulf countries are keen to flatter Iran so as to preserve a modicum of their national sovereignty.
The Arab common market and Fertile Crescent idea evaporated and with it the dream of resurrecting the Hejaz Railway that ran from Istanbul to Holy Mecca across Syria and Jordan.
Even the Europeans are buying the Iranian oil flowing through the Abadan-Tartus pipeline. They are also thinking of linking the European Gas Network with its Iranian counterpart. They have forgotten all about sanctions because the world always prefers to deal with winners.
On the Arab Gulf home front, young men are seething. They feel their governments let them down by failing to face up to the Iranian stratagem. The young men are in a sectarian tinderbox and buckling under economic stress. Extremism is rampant and the security services are busy hunting down extremist groups.
A nightmare, don’t you think?

James Miller takes both Ja’afari and Amanpour to task in a lightning-fast bit of media analysis. Contrast with the insubstantial meringue offered above in re Khan al Asal:

Amanpour’s silly question had other repercussions. Ja’afari basically stopped listening to Amanpour’s questions, as he sensed that the questions were designed to lecture him. And he was right in that assumption – Amanpour seemed to be more focused on lecturing Ja’afri than in getting him to actually answer questions. She framed the entire interview, for instance, by saying that Assad’s cronies were filling the airwaves, trying to get their spin out, because they were afraid of being devastated by airstrikes, a problem of their own making.

I don’t have a problem with Amanpour for taking Ja’afari to task for being a lying snake. Ja’afari is a lying snake. But instead of badgering the witness, Amanpour should have challenged Ja’afari on the new lies that came out in his interview. She could have challenged him on the substance of what he said, catching him in his own traps in the process.

And there were a bunch of lies to catch. For instance, Ja’afari was more interested in talking about the March chemical attack in Khan al Assal, Aleppo, than the August 21st attack in Damascus. Ja’afari’s position was that France, the UK, and the United States were blocking the UN from investigating the site of the attack. This is patently false. Furthermore, Ja’afari said that that same coalition decided that UN inspectors in Syria would only be investigating whether a chemical attack took place, and not who did it.

So what really happened? As I’ve pointed out, before the August 21st chemical attack, the Khan al Asal incident was the most complicated and deadly of the chemical weapons attacks in Syria. First, there was compelling evidence that the victims of the attack were suffering from chemical inhalation. Secondly, there was another attack, one that the regime (and, for whatever reason, therefore most of the media) has never acknowledged. At the exact same time as the attack in Khan al Asal, an opposition stronghold was gassed outside of Damascus, right on the front lines of battle, in a town called Otaybah that the regime had been trying to retake. The Syrian regime and Russia have never wanted the UN inspectors to visit anywhere except Khan al Asal, despite the fact that UN members wanted to explore Otaybah, and other claimed chemical weapons sites.

These facts, which have escaped the media for the most part, are just some of the reasons why the claims of Russia and Assad that the Syrian rebels used sarin that day do not hold water.

Amanpour missed this, of course.

Despite the world-spanning conspiracy chuffing made above by the 82%, still no coherent account of a ‘rebel’-side chemical attack here at SC. Pretty feeble and quite indicative.

DALLAS: A senior US Congress representative from Dallas Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson has said that she is leaning towards a no to vote on “war authorization in Syria”.

She made this statement while talking to American Muslim Democratic Caucus Co-Chair Syed Fayyaz Hassan and Director of South Asia Democracy Watch Mr. Zahid Khanzada at Labor Day picnic hosted by Dallas County Democratic Party.
…
Syed Fayyaz Hassan while praising Congresswoman Johnson’s long record of opposing all wars said “this is your voting record that you have always opposed wars in your congressional carrier and we hope that you will also vote against this possible war.”

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., suggested he would require any resolution approving U.S. military involvement in Syria pass the Senate by a filibuster-proof majority.

Paul hinted Tuesday that he could invoke the parliamentary procedure to delay or effectively block a vote to approve President Barack Obama’s request for authority to launch strikes against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Please not stoop to some other posters’ style. You know I do not exchange impolite posts. You are not in my bad book. I appreciate that your views are not blinded by Basharism. There is a way how people talk to each others.
—
You are so stuck on drinking. What is your problem here? Do you have any problem with people freedom consuming alcohol? 😉

Syrians probably still have no clear ideas what exactly US military is targeting.

It will anything potentially to be used as offense and defense against Israel: Airplanes, ballistic missiles, long range rockets, air defense and commander center.

We Syrians are going to watch hundreds of US missiles raining down on Syria. What left are just a bunch of foot soldiers with Ak47 and old tanks.

Irony is that if the rebels can get a hold of those heavy weapons now, it will give US more resolve to destroy them . Even civil war stops tomorrow, US is still coming.

It will be achievement that Israel has not been able or dared to achieved.

It is an open and full scale invasion to Syria by US. It is not a full blown war between two countries simply because Syria is no match for US.

With what left for SAA then you will see the civil war will be creeping into every corner of Syria.

If you think 70% land of Syria has been devastated, until you see 100%.

A land with some oldest cities in mankind will suffer some ruins because of the most advanced weaponry will be flying over this land.

Expect casualties to be doubled and refugees to be tripled in Syria.

A country lays in ruins. That won’t bother US. Because that is what they are planning to: getting out their military attack then walking away, like what they have done to Iraq and Libya as long as Israel feels absolutely “not threatened”

Syrians in US will be put very close watch under FBI. Because after the military invasion to Syria, US government is expecting some Syrians in US will feel angry, frustrated or any emotion that can pose potential threats to security.

” Amanpour seemed to be more focused on lecturing Ja’afri than in getting him to actually answer questions”

If Jaafari is a snake, he is an non-poisonous one while Amanpour is an arrogant pretentious scorpio. She even looks like one.

While she was showing off using disparaging remarks, changing subject when she was cornered, ironizing that Jaafari looked worried, Jaafari was dignified, composed and certainly sad to see political lies flying all over and his country and his brothers and sisters in Syria, already in a pityful state subjected to more humiliation and destruction

Watching Amanpour as a CNN queen trying to belittle and humiliate a great man like Jaafari was a painful experience.
She is a hopeless and direspectful thug that only deserve a spit on her face.

Two Democratic House members who oppose the authority President Barack Obama is seeking for a military strike against Syria offered an alternative resolution that would prohibit use of U.S. troops in that country.

Representatives Chris Van Hollen of Maryland and Gerald Connolly of Virginia said in a statement Obama’s request “could open the door to large scale military involvement in Syria.” Their resolution would ban “any American forces on the ground in Syria” and limit the authority of Obama to take military action to 60 days.

BEIRUT, Sept. 3 (Xinhua) — Lebanese President Michel Suleiman expressed Tuesday his rejection of foreign military intervention in Syria, calling for reaching a political solution to the unrest in the neighboring country.

Suleiman made his remarks during a meeting with the ambassadors of the permanent members at the UN Security Council, UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Derek Plumbly and representatives of the European Union and Arab League in Beirut, according to a statement by the presidential media office.

If you were witness to a strong man hitting his small little child in the street, wouldn’t you stop him if he was about to kill his child wouldn.t you call the police to arrest him. Assad is such a criminal he needs to be punished for his deeds, US is right in punishing him , it is not occupation , it is not illegal action, it is justified and the reasonable thing to do

Bill
the defector I mentioned above proves beyond any doubt that Assad used CW

Abbas condemns Syria strikes
“We do not accept any strike against an Arab country, we will not allow that.”
President Abbas says Palestinian Authority opposes attack on Syria, says Hamas working against Egypt

Ramallah, Asharq Al-Awsat—Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said on Monday that he opposed any US strike on Syria, and advocated a political solution to the Syrian crisis.

Speaking at a meeting of the Revolutionary Council of the Fatah Movement, Abbas said: “The situation in Syria is dangerous, America is going to strike Syria with missiles. Our stance is unchanged, we are against the strike. We do not accept any strike against an Arab country, we will not allow that. At the same time, we condemn the use of chemical weapons and we want a peacef

President Barack Obama faces “an uphill battle in making the case for U.S. military action in Syria,” the people at the Pew Research Center say, reporting on a poll showing that, by a 48 to 29 percent margin, more Americans oppose than support military airstrikes against Syria.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll finds even stronger opposition to a missile strike, with nearly six in 10 opposed.

My war assessment is that Russia is going to handle the Integrated air defenses, their will be a multi cone shaped electronic radar and anti missile Defense shield, surrounding Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, and all Important military bases.

It is my belief, that the ground strategy will be left to Syrian conventional forces. Syrian Special forces, Iranian Al Quds Brigade, and Hezbollah, will blaze a S.A.M. Trail through Israel, and capture Haifa and Tel Aviv in 3 -4 days depending on the resistance. The Golani, Brigade, and other I.D.F. Units have been badly degraded since the 2006 war with Hezbollah.

Israeli Youth don’t have the stomach for War. 35% of the Israeli reserve are draft dodgers. In 2006 six George Bush gave Israel 30 days to defeat Hezbollah, and with all their Air power, the Israeli’s didn’t penetrate two miles in to Lebanon!

This time Hezbollah has the Advantage, of possessing, Iranian Misgah-2 Missiles, Syrian mobile S.A.M. batteries, Strela and grouse, MANPADS, fortified re enforcements and new weapon systems for Hezbollah, will be a game changer!

Now for the Naval strategy, Syrian special operations, and their fast attack boat squadrons, under Iranian and Russian supervision will deal effectively with N.A.T.O. Allies, Sea mines, Helicopter gunships with fire and forget Sunburn/Yakhont Missiles and Torpedos if this arsenal is used effectively, it will keep the weak NATO Alliance, at an in affective respectable distance.

From the Department of Supreme Ironies: President Barack Obama, who seeks to punish an Arab state for violating international norms on the use of weapons of mass destruction, is relying on the hawkish Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, along with Aipac, the main pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington, to get his message across to Congress.

A government minister, Alain Vidalies, on Tuesday said that Mr. Hollande hadn’t ruled out holding a vote on any French involvement in Syria. But Mr. Hollande won’t put the issue to a vote on Wednesday, when parliament is due to debate the issue, an aide said. The aide added that the president hasn’t made up his mind on whether to do so at a later date.

The rebels meanwhile have been hampered by divisions, with radical Islamists emerging as the prevalent force seeking to topple Assad, fighting with the FSA and Kurdish groups. What began as a peaceful uprising turned into a war involving about 1,200 groups, according to U.S. intelligence estimates.

Also, while the fighters have made gains on the ground, they have failed to overcome Assad’s forces.

The planned attacks by the FSA are also unlikely to work, said Richard Kemp, a former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies.

He said the U.S. does not intend to hit the Syrian military so hard that it would expose it to a final push from the rebels.

‘More Talk’

“The idea they can suddenly launch an offensive that will bring down Assad because the Americans are carrying out some surgical airstrikes is probably unlikely,” Kemp said. What the rebels are attempting to do is show that they are “trying to exploit what the Americans are planning to do to Assad. It’s more talk than reality,” he said.

Obama has less legitimacy and popular support for the proposed bombing than almost any US military action in recent history.

President Obama’s proposed “humanitarian” bombing of Syria, which seemed like a done deal just a few days ago, is now running into serious trouble both at home and abroad. This is a great thing for those who care about human life, and increases the chances that Washington and its allies may eventually be forced to support a negotiated solution to Syria’s bloody civil war.

In a major blow to both Prime Minister David Cameron and President Obama, the UK parliament voted on Thursday to reject a military attack on Syria, and Cameron pledged to respect their decision.

Now we can see why the Obama administration has been in such a hurry to lob cruise missiles at Syria, that it didn’t want to wait even a couple of days for the UN inspectors to do their job. No one had put forth any military or security reason for the rush to attack; no one claimed that speed was essential or even relevant to saving any lives. Rather, it now seems, the urge to shoot first and ask questions later was driven by the need to carry out this illegal attack before the public, and their representatives in national and international bodies, could weigh in.

The US public has been deeply suspicious because of what the New York Times politely calls the “botched intelligence” leading up to the Iraq war, which most Americans would more plainly refer to as “lies.” Then the Associated Press reported that “the intelligence linking Syrian President Bashar al-Assad or his inner circle to an alleged chemical weapons attack that killed at least 100 people is no “slam dunk,” and that this “uncertainty calls into question the statements by Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden”.

Time is not on the side of the “humanitarian” would-be bombers. Here in Washington, at least 162 members of the US. House of Representatives have publicly demanded a Congressional debate and vote before the US takes any military action against Syria. This is, of course, a legal requirement in the United States, under our Constitution and the 1973 War Powers Resolution. The Republicans lost their majority in Congress in 2006 largely because of the Iraq war; so there are political risks here that will be more noticed as the debate widens.

Even before the British vote, the Obama team had less legitimacy and popular support for its proposed bombing than almost any US military action has had in recent history. No UN Security Council resolution, which would be the requirement for legality under international law; no support from the Arab League, nor even one Arab government, which Washington had for the bombing of Libya; not even NATO, which Washington can generally count on for almost any war. And now the UK has refused to join Obama’s “coalition of the willing”, leaving him with an unprecedented level of international isolation if he chooses to carry out his threat to bomb Syria.

Americans are against the intervention by a 60% majority; similar or larger majorities in Germany, France, the UK, Turkey, Egypt, and what looks like most of the world are also against it.

Then there is the problem of even defining what the objectives are. Obama has insisted that his goal is not regime change, and that is probably the most believable part of his story. Unfortunately, the implications of this pledge turn out to be even uglier than an attempted overthrow. Much uglier. War advocate Edward Luttwak described in the New York Times what is very likely official policy: bleed both sides indefinitely, and then maybe pick up the pieces when there is not much left of either. This makes sense from a ruthless, imperial point of view, since the strategic objective for years has been to weaken Bashar al-Assad; but now that al-Qaida-type forces are the bulk of the military opposition, their victory is not very appealing.

The strategy is reminiscent of (then senator) Harry Truman’s statement about the second world war on 23 June 1941:

“If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible.”

Even in the age of precision airstrikes and satellite imagery, fairly inexpensive decoys can fool incoming cruise missiles and aircraft-launched bombs.

There are several reasons why decoys are a problem for U.S. and French war planners in Syria. One is Russian involvement in supplying Assad’s regime. The Russian company Rusbal sells inflatable tanks, antiaircraft missiles, and radar that could have been transferred to Syria. We saw such decoy systems firsthand during a trip to a Russian arms show. Rusbal is just one vendor of decoys—there are certainly other, less well-known versions.

2) Misdirection

President Obama has been firm about not putting American troops on the ground in Syria. One consequence of that is a lack of intelligence from trusted sources. A clever Syrian operative could contaminate the targeting process so that bombs fall on empty deserts, rebel positions, or civilian areas. (Dead civilians would be used to galvanize international opposition to the strikes.)

3) Scatter, Hide, and Hunker

By definition, limited airstrikes can’t destory every Syrian military asset. The conundrum for Assad is deciding what to hide.

If you take the Obama administration’s word on keeping the strikes limited, the Assad regime needs only to sit and wait out the attack. With active support of the rebels not on the table, and regime change not a stated goal of the attack, there’s not a lot Assad has to do.

But he should be wary—the Libya regime change started with a humble no-fly zone that quickly became active support for rebel groups. It’s not out of the question that a limited strike could become a “decapitation strike” aimed at taking out the nation’s leadership.

Assad’s best defense against that option is that the sudden collapse of his regime would spark regional chaos and increasing power for radical Islamic groups, which the U.S.and its Middle Eastern allies desperately want to avoid.

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll has finally found something that Americans like even less than Congress: the possibility of U.S. military intervention in Syria. Only 9 percent of respondents said that the Obama administration should intervene militarily in Syria; a RealClearPolitics poll average finds Congress has a 15 percent approval rating, making the country’s most hated political body almost twice as popular.

Those August numbers mark the first time more people disapproved of Obama’s foreign policy approach than approved.

His numbers on the question have fallen rapidly since December 2012 when 52 percent approved of the job he was doing on foreign policy. (Some of that is attributable to the post-election glow that Obama and every re-elected president enjoys.)

The administration has cited the need to deter and prevent use of chemical weapons – a defensible goal, though Syrians have suffered from far deadlier mass atrocities during the course of the conflict.
The administration also refers to the need, given Obama’s asserted “red line” against use of chemical weapons, to protect Washington’s credibility – again an understandable objective, though unlikely to resonate much with Syrians.
But the priority must be the welfare of the Syrian people. Whether or not military strikes are ordered, this only can be achieved through imposition of a sustained ceasefire and widely accepted political transition.
The ICG writes that the chances of forming an international consensus to support US-led strikes are next to zero, and doubts that a limited attack would deter Mr. Assad from using chemical weapons again if his back was against the wall and he was facing defeat. The group expresses concern that Assad could intensify conventional attacks on rebels and civilians in response to a US strike. Whatever slim chance the US could have brokered a diplomatic solution will evaporate after an attack.

Conspiracy cheerleading at #368 uses disinformation to further murk up regime complicity.

Is it accidental that once the UN team were ready to go to Khan al Assal, another “chemical attack” happened to divert ‘urgently’ the team away from Khan Al Assal?

I think France and the UK knew very well that the rebels used sarin in Khan al Assal and that they wanted to avoid it to be made public.

I am convinced that the arranged attack Al Ghuta was to prevent the UN team to reveal the horrors that the rebels did.

That is the line from the frontlines of Assad cheerleading: a vast and meticulous conspiracy of ‘staged’ or ‘arranged’ chemical attacks by the ‘rebel’ side.

Yes, the ‘rebels,’ along with Saudia Arabia, Israel, the spies of America, the UK and France, performed a chemical attack on their own territory.

We come to expect this kind of thing from conspiracy mongers. Over the many months of horror in Syria, this side has denied every single escalation of arms from the regime. This particular cheerleader has denied the evidence of his senses, and has asked us to accept his beliefs:

— Syrian security did not shoot protesters
— Syrian shabiha enforcers do not exist
— Syria did not use artillery against civilian areas
— Syria did not rocket-bomb civilian areas
— Syria did not use fuel-air bombs in civilian areas
— Syria did not use cluster bombs in civilian areas
— Syria did not bomb breadlines
— Syria has done nothing reprehensible against civilians

After spending much of the past four years decrying President Obama’s alleged overreach in circumventing Congress, neoconservatives are furious with the president for … deciding to consult Congress before attacking Syria.

Former senator Joe Lieberman echoed the sentiment on Fox News Sunday: “Our enemies are cheering now … and our allies are worried.” Lieberman added that it’d be “catastrophic” if the democratically elected members of Congress do what polls suggest most Americans want and vote down a strike.

Going to Congress is “how not to run a foreign policy,” neoconservative éminence grise and former Bush adviser Elliot Abrams wrote in Politico today. “This erratic conduct leaves U.S. foreign policy in a shambles,” he added.

The ironic thing, of course, is that many of these same voices have repeatedly accused Obama of circumventing Congress and overstepping his executive authority on every other issue — only to turn around and attack him for now wanting to consult Congress.

McCain has slammed Obama for ignoring lawmakers on everything from domestic policy to Benghazi, using strident rhetoric about the importance of representative democracy that seems totally at odds with his current finger waving on Libya. ”Your administration’s disdain towards congressional authority and its failure to disclose public records feeds into its adversarial relationship with Congress and fuels public distrust in government,” McCain wrote in a letter to the White House in June.

“I agree that any chemical attack, particularly one that kills civilians, is horrible and horrendous. All deaths in war and violence are terrible and should be condemned,” he wrote. “But why are a few hundred killed by chemical attack any worse or more deserving of U.S. bombs than the 100,000 already killed in the conflict? Why do these few hundred allegedly killed by [Syrian President Bashar] Assad count any more than the estimated 1,000 Christians in Syria killed by U.S. allies on the other side? Why is it any worse to be killed by poison gas than to have your head chopped off by the U.S.-allied radical Islamists, as has happened to a number of Christian priests and bishops in Syria?”

America’s largest pro-Israel lobby has deployed its organization in Congress to push for the president’s war authorization against Syria, according to a senior official with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) who called the effort a “full court press.”

Earlier Tuesday, AIPAC issued a strong statement supporting the president’s call for congressional authorization of limited airstrikes against Syria. A senior official at AIPAC tells The Daily Beast that the organization’s leadership received a phone call from a senior White House official on Saturday, after the president’s surprise announcement that he would be seeking congressional authorization for a Syria strike, asking what AIPAC’s position would be on a congressional resolution. This official said the lobby received similar calls from Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.

WASHINGTON – Three influential pro-Israel groups urged US lawmakers on Tuesday to authorize President Barack Obama to launch an attack on Syria, signaling a stepped-up lobbying effort for American military action.

The statements by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) represented the groups’ most public show of support for US military action

A reference to the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC was mysteriously cut from a New York Times article published online Monday and in print Tuesday. The first version, published online Monday, quotes an anonymous administration official calling AIPAC the “800-pound gorilla in the room.” The original article, which is still available on The Boston Globe’s site, had two paragraphs worth of quotes from officials about the powerful lobbying group’s position in the Syria debate.

The newer version makes no reference to AIPAC and does not include an editor’s note explaining any change, other than a typical note at the end of the story noting that a version of the article appeared in the Tuesday print edition of the Times.

But journalists and media critics took note of the change. Around 5:00 a.m. Tuesday, Bloomberg View columnist Jeffrey Goldberg tweeted, “Unless, I’m mistaken, all references to AIPAC cut from this story.”

Goldberg told POLITICO the missing AIPAC piece is “strange” and suggested that someone from AIPAC or the White House complained.

“I don’t know what’s going on, but it’s very strange. It doesn’t make sense that it was cut for space in the print edition, because the AIPAC passage was quite newsworthy. Plus, there’s obviously no space issue on the Web. It seems plausible that someone from AIPAC, or the White House, complained about the accuracy of the passage,” Goldberg said.

http://7ee6an.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/honorable/our-silence-kills-them/
…The fact that liar Assad claims that 80% to 90% of his enemies are Al-Qaida is sufficient for many Syrians to believe the opposite. Realities on the ground support the assertion that the terrorists are not his enemies, they are his agents, and their job is not merely to provide propaganda fodder and to tarnish the revolution, but to also exact his vengeful horrors on those who dared defy his sick rule.

Spare a thought for those Syrians in their expensive cars as they drive to and from Beirut every time the tensions rack up. I mean how bad must it be for them to have to inconvenience their lovely mundane lives in the well protected posh districts of Damascus and come face to face with the kind of Syrians that they have spent the last forty years ignoring. That’s right, you know who I am talking about. I’m talking about the small people who have cleaned your houses, washed your cars, delivered your groceries and are the unwitting subjects of your mediocre photographic skills and nostalgic writings. Yes, those Syrians, the ones that don’t have enough money to drive straight through the Masnaa’ crossing area and have to squat down in the sun whilst the Lebanese border guards beat them with hoses to keep everybody in line.

With President Obama petitioning Congress to approve a strike on Syria, it could be time for another Washington episode of let’s make a deal.

The president, at a meeting with key members of Congress on Tuesday morning, said he’s confident lawmakers will ultimately approve his request to use military force. He suggested he’s willing to modify that request to accommodate Congress’ concerns.

But with such a high-stakes measure on the table, it raises concerns that the negotiations will become a vehicle for a string of political swaps that have little to do with Syria.

“I think the White House candy store is open,” John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under the George W. Bush administration, told Fox News.

Bolton, who said he opposes any military strike at this point, cautioned that the White House will act as a favor factory in order to get this passed.

“What do you need for your district or state? A post office, a new military facility — what do you want? I think anything you want, you’re going to get. Because the White House is going to do whatever it takes to get a majority,” he said.

President Vladimir Putin warned the West against taking one-sided action in Syria but also said Russia “doesn’t exclude” supporting a U.N. resolution on punitive military strikes if it is proved that Damascus used poison gas on its own people.

In a wide-ranging interview with The Associated Press and Russia’s state Channel 1 television, Mr. Putin said Moscow has provided some components of the S-300 air defence missile system to Syria but has frozen further shipments. He suggested that Russia may sell the potent missile systems elsewhere if Western nations attack Syria without U.N. Security Council backing.

“From our viewpoint, it seems absolutely absurd that the armed forces, the regular armed forces, which are on the offensive today and in some areas have encircled the so-called rebels and are finishing them off, that in these conditions they would start using forbidden chemical weapons while realising quite well that it could serve as a pretext for applying sanctions against them, including the use of force,” he said.

“If there are data that the chemical weapons have been used, and used specifically by the regular army, this evidence should be submitted to the U.N. Security Council,” added Mr. Putin, a former officer in the Soviet KGB. “And it ought to be convincing. It shouldn’t be based on some rumours and information obtained by special services through some kind of eavesdropping, some conversations and things like that.”

“All these arguments turned out to be untenable, but they were used to launch a military action, which many in the U.S. called a mistake. Did we forget about that?” Mr. Putin said.

Asked what kind of evidence on chemical weapons use would convince Russia, Mr. Putin said “it should be a deep and specific probe containing evidence that would be obvious and prove beyond doubt who did it and what means were used.”

Mr. Putin said it was “too early” to talk about what Russia would do if the U.S. attacked Syria.

“We have our ideas about what we will do and how we will do it in case the situation develops toward the use of force or otherwise,” he said. “We have our plans.”

Mr. Putin called the S-300 air defence missile system “a very efficient weapon” and said that Russia had a contract for its delivery of the S-300s to Syria. “We have supplied some of the components, but the delivery hasn’t been completed. We have suspended it for now,” he said.

“But if we see that steps are taken that violate the existing international norms, we shall think how we should act in the future, in particular regarding supplies of such sensitive weapons to certain regions of the world,” he said.

Bravo. Redneck ignorance against Syrians blasted by US Senator John McCain.

He shamed an aggressively prejudiced Fox TV interviewer by pointing out that those declaring “Allahu Akbar” were the same as Christians declaring “Thank God”.

(He also said most Syrian opposition fighters were moderates.)

RELEVANT FACT: Western troops in conflicts are accompanied by religious personnel, they assemble for prayer before going out to fight, and quotes from the bible and prayers are often written on missiles. Not because they are fighting for Christian causes, but because many draw comfort and strength from their religion when facing fear and danger.

Both Christians and Muslims behave like normal human beings in the same situation.

It is a scandal. Assad bought British MP and also an article in Vogue and God knows who. The evil couple knew exactly what they were doing, dine and wine and pay for first class travel and stay and influence opinion. .

• Nine Conservative MPs who did not vote for government plans for launching military action in Syria have received hospitality from the Assad regime over the last 10 years, it has emerged. They include Sir Richard Shepherd, Crispin Blunt, and David TC Davies, who all voted against the motion for military action.

Apple Mini
Get rid of CW and get rid of Assad, and I guaranttee you there will not be a strike,
The criminal Assad has to be punished, Putin today said if CW were used UNSC will agree to punish the user.

Assad is more isolated than ever.
An attack against Assad has to include plans to strike HA, Syria and Lebanon has to be cleaned from those filty criminal alliances

It is a scandal. Assad bought British MP and also an article in Vogue and God knows who. The evil couple knew exactly what they were doing, dine and wine and pay for first class travel and stay and influence opinion. .

• Nine Conservative MPs who did not vote for government plans for launching military action in Syria have received hospitality from the Assad regime over the last 10 years, it has emerged. They include Sir Richard Shepherd, Crispin Blunt, and David TC Davies, who all voted against the motion for military action.

Well Tara MPs, members of government etc make all the time visits to foreign countries. They all are treated by their hosts. Often those “visiting” politicians are those knowing much of the real situation of the country and know local people. Those politicians who have never visited Syria are solely depending of the propaganda fed to them – isn’t that a scandal.

The former Finnish president (social democrat) who visited Syria officially some years ago is against any outside military actions against Syria. The present president (conservative) who has not visited Syria has been demanding, that if any military actions are made, they can happen only through UN authorization.

I guess Bandar Bin Sultan, the CIA and the Mossad have been playing poker instead of “conspiring” to trap Bashr Al Assad.

Oh no! no one is conspiring… they are just looking at facts just like in Iraq. Shalaby and his team were not conspirators they were loyal citizen. The killers of Harari were not conspirators, conspiracies do not exist.

It is so funny that when anyone tries to uncover a plot, there is a voice dismissing it: Oh no! not a conspiracy theory again.

Contrary to you, I do not underestimate Bandar Ben Sultan intelligence,the CIA and Mossad capabilities and I believe they are conspiring continuously about way to trap Bashar al Assad.
There are too many coincidences between the Khan A Assal and al Ghuta chemical attacks to be just accidental.
Whether you believe or not that’s your choice. I made mine

The reality is that Washington has sought the overthrow of the Assad regime almost from the moment that fighting erupted in 2011. Assad’s departure has been the stated goal of U.S. policy for the past year, and the Obama administration has provided aid to insurgent forces. Although the aid began as humanitarian and supposedly nonlethal items, it now includes military assistance and training. Given that track record and the nature of the overall U.S. policy toward Syria, it is preposterous for the administration to argue that missile strikes would not have a similar goal of regime change. One cannot segregate elements of policy in that fashion.

The administration needs to be honest with Congress and the American people and admit that the proposed U.S. attacks on Assad’s forces would be designed to advance the goal of regime change. Representatives and Senators should also ask hard questions about just how Assad’s overthrow would be in the best interests of the American people

If Israel,Jordan and Turkey participate in the US aggression against Syria, Syria warns that they’ll bear the consequences.
Fearing such retaliation, these three countries have set US Patriot anti-missiles system months ago on their borders with Syria

…
While he repeatedly called for reconciliation, Mr. Mekdad warned of the repercussions of a U.S. attack on Syria. He said Damascus would strike back not only at Israel, but also at Syria’s neighbors Jordan and Turkey if they take part in any U.S.-led operation.

“Once the war starts nobody can control what will happen,” he said. “We believe that any attack against Syria will definitely result in chaos in the entire region if not beyond.”

He also said military action would strengthen extremist rebel factions affiliated with al Qaeda, not the moderate opposition fighters the U.S. has sought to bolster.

All wild beasts in the regime are ready to the sacrifice. Assad he says he can destroy Israel. Ok, show it before you are destroyed. Attack first and then show how can you defend yourself. If I was living in Damascus I would leave soon because even a nuclear bomb can be thrown if Hezballah attack with chemicals the north of Israel. Assad the beast is ready to take Damascus with him to the underworld. I do not believe. Now it is to the US to show if they are really the leaders in militar technology and can track not only the Chemical Weapons but also the location of THE BEAST. Bashar AL WAHSH.

Just so you may know, our distinguished benefactors made few observations, and then released the following heads up.

Skimming through criminal pervert supporters comments, we sense a heightened level of disorientation mixed with despair and signs of confounded denial.

It always starts as we observed and then it will be followed by acceptance and resignation.

But the fate of your pervert is signed, sealed and delivered.

Based on these observations, our distinguished benefactors are now working hard behind the scenes and around the clock to maintain the status quo for at least 60 days, the full term of the first congressional mandate for military action. Real action may take place within the second extension of 30 days. But then again everything is up for revision and we may see action during the first 60 days term. Our benefactors believe that maximum benefits can be achieved by keeping Pervert Inc. in constant state of turmoil, anxiety and guesswork.

All supporters of Assad atrocities who live outside Syria must go to Syria to defend Assad Pharaon and act as human (?) shields.

Do not lose more time. Come on,if you are so brave Assad believers go and beat Israel with him or shut your mouth forever. All Assad supporters in Lebanon go to Damascus to fight. All Shabihas and moukhabaraats around the world go to Damascus to side Assad the Wahsh.

The keyword of that attack is ‘re-balance’. It reveals what is really behind the ‘punishment’

France, UK and the USA have backed down at providing serious ‘lethal’ aid to the rebels and they have been watching with dismay the rebels collapsing militarily. They see Bashar al Assad expanding back his control over the country.
The immediate consequence is that the opposition pressed to participate in the USA-Russia-UN peace talk considers itself far too weak to face Bashar al Assad at the Geneva conference.

Therefore, unable to directly providing military power to the rebels for fear it falls in the wrong hand, there was a need be get a solid pretext for the West to instead ‘degrade’ the SAA capabilities urgently before the rebels militias are totally annihilated.

Then came then Al Ghuta ‘attack’, just on time to provide that long needed and now unavoidable pretext for ‘re-balancing’

This is why that attack is suspicious. It came at a time when the SAA had plenty of weapons to use against the rebels without the need of using prohibited chemical weapons, while the rebels were begging for lethal weapons and loosing ground.

Therefore the real goal of the strikes is not to punish but to give the rebels a chance to get the upperhand and therefore “re-balance ” the power differences.
The West hopes that either the Syrian government would collapse or becomes so weak that the opposition will feel strong enough to accept to go to the negotiation table

The myth that rebels were losing ground was debunked on multiple occasions. It was a stalemate and indeed analysts documented more small victories to the FSA compared to the regime. The regime unleashed chemical weapon against its people to gain land.

If the government did use chemical weapons and is faced with being overthrown by the US why not use chemical weapons now? I would if I faced an American “shock and awe” attack.

What would Syria have to lose? Load the missiles with sarin and use them on the enemy. Show what a real chemical attack can do. Using them on a few hundred terrorists is nothing – using them on 100,000 is more like it.

Anyone can tell Obama wants to murder Assad like he murder the Libyan leader. What does Assad have to lose?

The French government has not ruled out a vote, but he will be keen to avoid an embarrassing rejection of military strikes
..
The public is as well, with a poll released on the eve of the debate showing nearly three quarters of the French saying they want a vote on military action.
..
The UMP has said military action should be put to a vote unless two conditions are met: UN inspectors confirming the use of chemical weapons and the passing of a UN resolution giving a legal basis for using force.

The head of the UMP’s faction in the lower house National Assembly, Christian Jacob, said Hollande did not yet have the clear-cut legitimacy to order military strikes.

“(France) is isolated as it has never been before, is not supported by any European country and is dependent on a vote of the US Congress,” he said.

NATO would bomb Syria to the ground if they are allowed to, and would install a puppet government similar to those in the GCC if they are given a free hand, but losing Syria to NATO is not an option for Russia and Iran, and giving islamist rebels a free victory is worse to most than keeping this regime in place as long as it is weak and contained, the goal from day one was to end Syria as a functioning state that is an ally of Iran and an adversary of NATO and Israel, the war achieved most of its goals and left Syria divided and in ruins with 110,000 Syrians dead, 6 million refugees and a $ 73 billion bill to rebuild what was destroyed. A dangerous mix of evil elements made that possible: corrupt and brutal dictatorship, Al-Qaeda et al head cutters, an evil Ottoman neighbor, and GCC money to finance the war (the same way they financed 2 wars in the gulf).
we may end up with a strike that hurts the feelings of Assad but does not topple him or his regime, he will actually look better after the strike in the eyes of many and his Syrian opponents who supported the strike will look like little traitors, Assad enemies know that but they are having difficulties convincing the public that a major strike will be OK and can pass without a response, the argument is mostly about the scope of the attack, those of you who are saying “it is over” are dumb either by choice or due to stress.

One of the Syrian opposition leaders warned Washington that the American troops in the region would be attacked by squads of suicide bombers formed by the Syrian opposition in case Obama attacked Syria, Secretary General of the Syrian National Youth Party al-Chabaab, Maher Merhej, said in an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia.

Lobbying on Syria has inspired coalitions of the unlikely, aligning President Barack Obama with Sheldon Adelson, the Republican billionaire who spent about $70 million trying to defeat him last year, in the push for a military response to the use of chemical weapons.

“For our credibility, we have to do something,” said Morris Amitay, founder of the pro-Israel Washington Political Action Committee.

The support Obama is getting from pro-Israel groups in the U.S. is important because of their history of political influence. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other Jewish groups have long helped secure continued U.S. aid to Israel, mobilizing activists who visit or call lawmakers. The effort is supplemented by several political action committees that donate to candidates depending on their support for Israel.

Political Donations

The pro-Israel community contributed $14.5 million to federal campaigns for the 2012 elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That’s more than the $11.1 million in donations by the defense aerospace industry, one of the biggest and most consistent political contributors.

While most of the Jewish groups’ donations lean Democratic, Adelson alone transformed the 2012 Republican primary when he and his wife used $15 million in private funds to sustain the unsuccessful candidacy of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and then poured $53 million into groups advancing Republican nominee Mitt Romney. In all, Adelson and his wife donated $93 million to Republican causes in the 2012 campaign, center data shows.

‘Action Alert’

The Republican Jewish Coalition, which counts Adelson as a board member, yesterday sent an “action alert” to its 45,000 members, directing them to tell Congress to authorize force. “This is not a partisan issue,” the coalition said in its message.

Obama’s proposal also gained support from other U.S.-based Jewish organizations, including AIPAC, the Anti-Defamation League and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

Their advocacy began after a telephone briefing yesterday with White House deputy national security advisers Tony Blinken and Ben Rhodes, who outlined the case for action against Syria, according to a participant who asked for anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to discuss it publicly.

Jewish Holidays

Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, said the group decided to act before the Jewish high holidays, when rabbis will likely speak on Syria. Rosh Hashanah begins tonight.

U.S. organizations that support the anti-Assad rebels, including the Coalition for a Democratic Syria and the Syrian Support Group, said they are asking their members to urge Congress to back Obama’s plan.

“We’re going to be trying to show that if strikes take a particular form, it would be helpful to the opposition and could back Assad into a corner,” said Dan Layman, a spokesman for the Syrian Support Group, which has an office in Washington.

Former Syrian Defence Minister General Ali Habib, a prominent member of President Bashar al-Assad’s Alawite sect, has defected and is now in Turkey, a senior member of the opposition Syrian National Coalition told Reuters on Wednesday.

“Ali Habib has managed to escape from the grip of the regime and he is now in Turkey, but this does not mean that he has joined the opposition. I was told this by a Western diplomatic official,” Kamal al-Labwani said from Paris.
…

A Gulf source told Reuters that Habib had defected on Tuesday evening, arriving at the Turkish frontier before midnight with two or three other people. He was then taken across the border in a convoy of vehicles.

Born in 1939, Habib was defense minister from June 2009 to August 2011 and has also served as Chief of the General Staff of the Syrian Army. He is from the port city of Tartus.

Websites affiliated with Syrian opposition groups reported on Tuesday that General Ali Habib was found dead in his home a day after he was dismissed as defense minister. On Monday, Syrian President Bashar Assad appointed army chief Dawood Rajha to replace Habib.

The SANA news agency reported Monday that Habib had been suffering from a deterioration in his health.
…

Opposition websites also quoted Syria TV reports allegedly suggesting that Habib had died a natural death.

As the West was caught by surprise of what happened in Iraq where Iran became re-enforced, in Libya where Islamists took over the country and in Egypt where the Moslem Brotherhood, the promise of a ‘moderate Islam’ they supported collapsed, it is now on for a surprise in Syria after the “re-balancing” strikes. Not a good one, I think.
The West just does not understand the Middle East. They only rely on Israeli intelligence and they blindly believe the Arab expats. That’s why they get bad surprises all the time.

Iran suffered of the weapons of mass destruction that the West, including France willingly supplied to their ally Saddam Hossein during the Iraq-Iran war.
Iranians are the only with the Kurds and the Japanese than cannot be suspected of wanting to use WMD

French PM: Not acting in Syria would send wrong message to Iran and North Korea

A lack of international action to the chemical attack in Syria would risk sending Iran the wrong message over its nuclear programme, France’s Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has warned.

Producing someone with “proof” is what the West does before they murder a million people. This is expected and predictable.

Iraqi Curveball

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi (Arabic: رافد أحمد علوان‎, Rāfid Aḥmad Alwān; born 1968), known by the Defense Intelligence Agency cryptonym “Curveball”,[1] is an Iraqi citizen who defected from Iraq in 1999, claiming that he had worked as a chemical engineer at a plant that manufactured mobile biological weapon laboratories as part of an Iraqi weapons of mass destruction program.[2] Alwan’s allegations were subsequently shown to be false by the Iraq Survey Group’s final report published in 2004.[3][4]

Despite warnings from the German Federal Intelligence Service and the British Secret Intelligence Service questioning the authenticity of the claims, the US Government and British government utilized them to build a rationale for military action in the lead up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, including in the 2003 State of the Union address, where President Bush said “we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs”, and Colin Powell’s presentation to the UN Security Council, which contained a computer generated image of a mobile biological weapons laboratory.[2][5] On 24 September 2002, the British government published its dossier on the former Iraqi leader’s WMD with a personal foreword by Mr Blair, who assured readers Saddam Hussein had continued to produce WMD “beyond doubt”.[6]

On November 4, 2007, 60 Minutes revealed Curveball’s real identity.[7] Former CIA official Tyler Drumheller summed up Curveball as “a guy trying to get his green card essentially, in Germany, and playing the system for what it was worth.”[2]

In a February 2011 interview with the Guardian he “admitted for the first time that he lied about his story, then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war.”[8]

Was John Kerry trip to Syria paid by Assad ? ( or undercover Syrian American Society). Their votes are tainted and they are exposed by the Press rightly so.

From where did John Kerry drop to this? Here in Europe MP’s and government officials and ministers travel all the time, often visiting also countries like Syria, Turkey, Israel, Lebanon etc in order to collect personal impressions, information and contacts and for trying to get a better understanding of the situation. That is how humans learn and collect knowledge also as decision makers. As said it is much more dangerous for a politician to sit in a “closed” room at home and rely solely on the propaganda told and showed to him/her.

The financing to these trips abroad comes from different sources. In most cases from the “traveller’s” own state’s budget. Obviously in Anglo-American countries also in many cases directly from lobbies. This British MPs trips to Syria are certainly not a special case and under same kind of circumstances MPs make trips to Saudi Arabia, Israel etc. The problem is in British (and US) legislation which has no clear rules about this who can pay trips and who not. Anyway the British Syrian Society is controlled by Britain and they have to report to Britain from where they get their financing.

Maybe American standard politicians should also travel to other countries than Israel. What was Bush junior’s experience and view of the world when he started as president? The fact that he now doesn’t dare to travel abroad is an other story.

DAMASCUS: Obama is trying to rush that congressional approval through because his favorite ____* are being exterminated as we write. The Syrian army set 2 ambushes yesterday in Jawbar and decimated what is left of the ___* army (FSA and J.N.). Syrian army officers are becoming truly expert in trapping these weasels and sending them to the hot vapors of Hell. It is inconceivable, even with the arrival of the newly-trained American mercenaries from Jordan, that any reinforcements will make any difference. The U.S. is coordinating its expected missile assault with a “big rush” by these Jordanian-based terrorists. But, as SyrPer has told you, a big surprise awaits Obama. It is the surprise that will put him right down there in the basement of American failed presidencies.

*censored to spare the feelings of war criminals, cannibals, bootlickers and other vermin

10:59 a.m. ET – Heritage Action for America, a conservative political advocacy group, announces it also opposes military action in Syria.

“Heritage Action is opposed to punitive missile strikes on the Syrian regime,” Dan Holler, the group’s communications director, said in a statement. “Yesterday’s hearing made it clear there is not a vital U.S. interest at stake. Further, there is not a clear, achievable, realistic purpose to the use of force being contemplated by the Obama administration and officials offered little evidence such action would prevent further abuses.”

10:58 a.m. ET — The Progressive Change Campaign Committee announces it’s sending a memo to members of Congress, including those whom the PCCC campaigned for, saying the progressive base overwhelmingly opposes military strikes Syria. According to a survey of its members, 73% of progressive respondents were not in favor of the president’s proposal for punitive action, while 18% supported the president’s decision.

“You now face a decision that involves life and death. This decision also involves billions of dollars. And it will send a signal to your constituents and the world about our nation’s morals and our ability to make strategic, goal-oriented decisions. This historic moment must transcend political party,” Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, the group’s co-founders, say in the memo. “Your progressive base stands firmly against military action in Syria.”

10:30 a.m. ET – Two new polls on Tuesday indicated that more people oppose rather than favor U.S. military strikes against Syria.

Both surveys were conducted before and after President Obama’s Saturday announcement that he would seek Congressional approval.

According to the survey from ABC News/Washington Post, 36% of Americans support military strikes, while 59% oppose. Support for strikes increases to 46% if other countries, such as Great Britain and France, participated.

Separately, a Pew Research Center poll shows that 29% Americans oppose military action, while 48% are against launching strikes.

“So while I agree with the president — I support the president, I hope we do have a very limited intervention that is designed to reduce the possibility of chemical weapons being used in the future … But if the Congress says no, I don’t think that is in any way a reflection on Barack Obama. I think that is a positive reflection on him for upholding the system and listening when he was told no by the people he works for, which is the American people.”

If we were to attack with the goal of destroying Assad then I would support it. Iran and Hezbollah are fighting for their lives because losing their ally would be a crippling blow to both. Iran is the greatest threat to US and Israeli interests in the region, far greater than some Al Qaeda rebels that would lead another failed Islamist state even if they did manage to gain total control. It would also be a great victory for the Kurds should Assad’s regime be toppled. However a limited small airstrike would do nothing but boost Assad’s reputation and actually serve as an incentive to use chemical weapons again just to thumb his nose at the US. Then what would our next move be?

The UK not going to openly participate in the murder of Syrian babies. I know that makes some here sad but I am sure Obama will be more than happy to kill Syrian woman and children and they will be able to celebrate soon.

It is a pity their own children are not in Damascus when the bombs start falling.

And Simo, it is infantile to think that by visiting a country for a few days on a trip paid by the lobby of that country, dined and wined in the presidential palace, Four Season Hotel, and hosted by its glamorous First Lady, one can pass a more educated judgement about that country.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) suggested this week that President Barack Obama would be using the U.S. military as “Al-Qaeda’s air force” if he went forward with plans to strike Syria over the use of chemical weapons.

But even after a wave of missile strikes launched from warships and possibly from B-2 bombers, Assad’s forces would still have artillery capable of unleashing lethal sarin gas or other chemical agents, analysts said.

“If we really wanted a military effect, what we could do is deprive the Assad regime of its most efficient delivery mechanism (for chemical weapons) — artillery,” said Jeffrey Martini, a Middle East analyst at the RAND Corporation think tank.

“That operation would look a lot different from the one that it seems the administration in envisioning,” he told AFP.

The military action that Congress is now debating appears to be about “psychological” effects and not “military effectiveness,” he said.
…

With Congress pushing Obama to impose explicit restrictions on the operation, including prohibiting any “boots on the ground,” the constraints could undermine the intended psychological impact of the missile strikes, according to Eisenstadt.

“Probably the main way Assad will respond will be to use chemical weapons again, but probably on a much lower level, similar to the way he did previously,” he said.

“In order to put the administration in the horns of a dilemma.”

Obama would then have to consider a second wave of strikes, opening himself up to criticism that he is dragging the United States into a quagmire — despite promising to avoid a repeat of the Iraq debacle.

In that scenario, if the United States chose not to launch further action, “Assad will be able to claim that he is unbroken, unbowed and defiant,” Eisenstadt said.

03.09.2013 morning Russian missile attack detection system recorded the start of two ballistic missiles from the central part of Mediterranean Sea to the east. Later reported that the rocket did not reach the coast about 300 km .
As reported in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation , ” The launch was detected in 10.16 MSK combat crew separate radio host in Armavir early warning system .”

From NATO headquarters in the afternoon reported that information about the launch of missiles tested at the moment.

Israel’s Defense Ministry reported that the missile launch was part of the joint test organized by the Ministry of Defense of Israel and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency . Sparrow target missile was launched from the F- 15 , after which it was detected by radar air defense system of the Israeli Arrow 2 , and information on fixed targets came to the command post .

In the eastern part of the Mediterranean are now a group of ships in the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN- 75 , the eighth built from the Nimitz -class ) , a series of missile cruisers CG ” Gettysburg ” CG- 64, and “San Jacinto ” CG- 56 and two destroyers and five American destroyers equipped with cruise missiles. Also, there is now a French frigate -type antiaircraft Horizon D621, Chevalier Paul.

Also Monday, the Red Sea, entered the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN- 68) – the first built in a series of Nimitz -class ships .

In the coming days, the grouping of the Russian Navy in the region will join the large anti-submarine ship of the Northern Fleet , and later it is supported by the Black Sea Fleet missile cruiser “Moskva” .

rancher 523
I guess you are a new comer.
Iran’s regime is unpopular among Persians and I personally believe that it will gradually be changed as the young generation starts to get engaged in politics,but Israel has done a lot more damage to the region’s stability and peace than Iran did.
Israel is the only apartheid state today that occupied land and build illegal settlements on land it does not own, it is also engaged in state terrorism (assassinations, air bombing attacks, etc), water theft (and soon gas and oil theft)and daily incursions into neighbors territories.
People who support Israel’s policies do so out of twisted religious beliefs, pressure from the Jewish lobby, ignorance or are just plain evil, feel free to pick a group !!

Probes from Khan al-Assal show chemicals used in the March 19 attack did not belong to standard Syrian army ammunition, and that the shell carrying the substance was similar to those made by a rebel fighter group, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated.

A statement released by the ministry on Wednesday particularly drew attention to the “massive stove-piping of various information aimed at placing the responsibility for the alleged chemical weapons use in Syria on Damascus, even though the results of the UN investigation have not yet been revealed.”

By such means “the way is being paved for military action” against Damascus, the ministry pointed out.

But the samples taken at the site of the March 19 attack and analyzed by Russian experts indicate that a projectile carrying the deadly nerve agent sarin was most likely fired at Khan al-Assal by the rebels, the ministry statement suggests, outlining the 100-page report handed over to the UN by Russia.

The parliamentary leader of France’s conservative opposition UMP said on Wednesday that his party could not support Socialist President François Hollande’s plans for military intervention in Syria without the full backing of the United Nations.

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh acknowledges building evidence that the chemical weapons attack in Syria was staged to frame President Bashar al-Assad.

On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Rush Limbaugh show, the talk show host acknowledged reports from the Associated Press that the admitted intelligence on Syria’s chemical weapons attack was “no slam dunk.”

He also announced he believes Obama may have been “complicit” in the attack and possibly helped plan it.

Limbaugh expressed doubt over allegations Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. Limbaugh asked if the allegations are true, what does Assad have to gain?

On Saturday morning, the talk show host received a note from a friend who spent time in the Middle East. In the note, Limbaugh’s friend vouched for Assad, claiming there’s “nothing in it for him,” and “he’s not that kind of guy,” describing the note as “almost a personal reference for Bashar.”

Limbaugh initially dismissed the claim and filed the note away stating “everybody wants to do my job” and “everybody wants to influence what I say.”

However, Limbaugh changed his mind when he discovered another piece making similar accusations by a journalist named Yossef Bodansky.

In the article Bodansky argues the “deception playing out in Syria is a deception similar to the one used in Sarajevo in 1995 to provoke air strikes against the Serbs for the benefit of the Bosnian Muslims.”

According to Limbaugh, “If this is true, this is the setup of all time.”

The article alleges the “US had intel involvement dating a week before the alleged chemical weapons attack in meetings that were anticipating a war changing event.”

“We could be looking at a frame job. Pretty big setup,” says Limbaugh.

“The rebels nerve gassed themselves in order to engineer a response that takes out Bashar, putting the US on the side of Al-Qaeda,” alleges Mr. Bodansky.

Another setback for Obama:
Sen. John McCain, President Obama’s biggest cheerleader on Capitol Hill for a strike in Syria, said Wednesday that he would not support a Senate panel’s draft resolution authorizing the use of force — forcing a key Senate panel to delay a vote.

WASHINGTON — A key Senate committee vote on the use of force against Syria is running into trouble, despite a bipartisan proposal that would greatly curtail President Obama’s authority to wage an “open-ended war.”

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., the lead Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said Wednesday that he’s working to allay senators’ concerns about the wording of the resolution, but the committee’s work may stretch “over the weekend.”

Revenir said
ability to think rationally.
That excludes you right away, you never showed us rationality in your thinking, one ,who reads your comments, thinks you are ex convict, worked in a zoo with rats and other rodents,and collected garbages from Assad house , believing every lie, and blocking yourself from seeing facts, I wonder sometimes if you are blind.

And Simo, it is infantile to think that by visiting a country for a few days on a trip paid by the lobby of that country, dined and wined in the presidential palace, Four Season Hotel, and hosted by its glamorous First Lady, one can pass a more educated judgement about that country.

It is en elementary student argument.

Seems that you Tara have not even reached the level of elementary student. Do you seriously believe that visiting MP’s and other politicians in any country are put in a youth hostels and been totally ignored by the country’s ruling elite. Sorry Tara, that is possible (and done) only in USA.

Normal age old diplomatic hospitality rules say, that visiting parliamentary and governmental delegations get a good treatment. Even if the quests are not the closest of friends. Surely if you are a Middle Eastern person (which I doubt) you understand, what the concept of hospitality means especially in Syrian culture. Do you seriously claim, that experienced British parliamentarians are bribed with a couple of meals in a Syrian presidential palace and meeting the wife of the Syrian president. Maybe in a naive B-class Hollywood movie (which seem to be the basis of your world view), but not in the real life.

8.08pm BST
Two amendments presented by John McCain to the Syrian war resolution have just passed the committee by voice vote, Dan Roberts reports.

The changes would seem to expand – perhaps significantly – the scope of the prospective American military campaign. In particular the second amendment flatly states “It is the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria.”

That doesn’t sound like “limited,” “tailored” strikes.

The first amendment adds language that “absent decisive change to the present military balance of power on the ground in Syria, sufficient incentives do not yet exist” to topple Assad.

The second amendment adds two paragraphs to the resolution:

(a) It is the policy of the United States to change the momentum on the battlefield in Syria so as to create favorable conditions for a negotiated settlement that ends the conflict and leads to a democratic government in Syria.

(b) A comprehensive US strategy in Syria should aim, as part of a coordinated international effort, to degrade the capabilities of the Assad regime to use weapons of mass destruction while upgrading the lethal and non-lethal military capabilities of vetted elements of Syrian opposition forces, including the Free Syrian Army.
,,,,,,,,,,

Now seriously, You are wasting your time and mine in a pretzel argument.

I asked you how by visiting a country on a trip paid by the host government, dining and wining, driving around with an entourage of security personnel, and attending a dinner with the first lady would make these people more qualified to judge that country than someone who did not visit with the retard and his wife.

This was the crux of your argument. You either respond to that point or keep quite.

Do you have an answer other than the British law, the Syrian hospitality, and where Tara is from?

“Why is Iran a threat? Who have they attacked in, say, the last 200 years?”

Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism in the world. Companies in Afghanistan are paying Taliban militants over $200 per month with bonuses of $1,000 for killing an American soldier and $6,000 for destroying a U.S. military vehicle. Iran is also running training camps for the Taliban. Iran is supplying RPGs, IED’s, C4 explosives, and even surface-to-air missiles to the Taliban. They did much the same in Iraq although on a much larger scale with Sadr’s militia and other Shia terrorist groups. They even had Guard units in Iraq, we actually captured some. Their puppet Assad ran a railroad to Jihadist wanting to go to Iraq to kill Americans. They supply a safe haven for Al Qaeda. Hamas and Hezbollah are funded and armed by Iran and Syria. They supply the rockets that fall like rain on Israel, the only functional democracy and ally of ours in the region. Should they get nukes they will destroy Israel without firing a shot. (See “Israel’s Cuban Missile Crisis – All the Time” by Victor Davis Hanson.)

Watching the latest worrying developments around Syria , it should be noted that the world anxiously refers to the decision of the U.S. war in Syria. And the world was divided not only by the state, which for the bombing and invasion , but that is strictly against . The West in the face of the avant-garde politics of world policeman United States and Britain , and France – for the bombing and invasion , others just the opposite – against , that Russia , China and most of the countries around the world .

But NATO countries are not so rosy , and in the very aggressive United States, Britain, France, is not so smooth. Most people are opposed. They all understand that die of any innocent people , women, children, old people , and just people .

Of course , Bashar al-Assad to submit the United States is a dictator, he is not a goal, it is a reason that only have drawn heavily ” by the ears .” The reason is that Syria is a transit corridor for the transport of hydrocarbons , and in addition there is the discovery of new deposits, which the U.S. and want to take for themselves.

The first part of the plans of the United States – is to get the transit of hydrocarbons coming from Saudi Arabia and in the future of Iran.
The next target is Iran . With full access to the Caspian Sea, the Caspian Sea to the oil-bearing regions , and without exception , it is both Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan , and Russia .

Iran and the Caspian Sea are considered as a source of resources already developed , that is, it’s just a resource wars , and not what is preventing people to live in their states ” president.”

Next to these ” tyrannical ” states safely exist in Saudi Arabia, that is the state of Saud , home to the medieval laws , where publicly chop sabers head , not hiding and showing all across these executions . Not this despotic regime of King they are interested in , because this king, like an obedient dog, fulfills all the requirements of the United States , and oil prices is estimated to be obedient suiting west.

How do we relate to the situation prevailing at the moment, in my personal opinion correctly Russia holds the position of strict legal assessment of the developments in this volatile region , which is to make decisions based on facts only evidence of the involvement in mass murder with the use of banned chemical weapons, which the U.S. full- yourself used in the war with Vietnam.

What we could help in the investigation ? Only the participation of our specialists as independent experts in the study of the nature of chemical substances.

In case of refusal and unsubstantiated bombing Syria, we must protect their help, not necessarily directly involved, but to provide air defense is our honor and duty to the World. Alternatively, it is not punched umbrella or Syria shot as Yugoslavia , as Libya, like Iraq.
Syrians will die a lot of people that do not have nobody to blame their “fault” that the United States, Britain, France needs oil and gas at their prices , and the best gift .

Believe to be true will build naval forces of the Russian Federation and at the ready to keep the aircraft, including strategic , Russian should not stand on the sidelines , or will be in the following chart wars , the U.S. and NATO. You can not afford to smear Russia , even diplomatically .

McCain wanted stronger language thinking that Obama is interested in helping Syrian rebels win more territories, the Senate is likely to approve the resolution but the real fight is in the Congress, either way, we still have until September 9th or after before we see the first cruise missile falls on Syria, that gives Russia 1 week or so to stop an attack or prepare for it, on the day of the attack, if it happens, those of you who supported the attack should mark it on a calendar and keep it for your children and grandchildren to remind them how “patriotic” their parents were !!
(I see no indication that a limited attack will change anything on the ground except giving Assad a green light to respond more forcefully since most Syrians will see his enemies as traitors)

American actually. The enemy of my enemy…I suspect you’ve heard that before? Three major Al Qaeda leaders are believed to be based Iran including Sulayman Abu Ghaith, Sayf Al Adl, and Bin Laden’s son, Saad. A quick web search:

@RonPaul
We need to act NOW to avoid disaster in #Syria. Sign my petition to tell Obama to stay out:
Tell President Obama: Stay Out of Syria’s civil war!
Intervention in Syria is not an option.
President Obama has already helped foment this civil war and supported the al-Qaeda jihadists. This is an explosive region, and more US intervention means more people will die. We should be choosing peace — not a new conflict.http://signup.ronpaulchannel.com/landing/sos/

Recently some MSM started to talk about possible breakup of Syria. And they contemplate that Alawites, Christians and other minorities will be settling along coast including Damascus. In particular they mention that “elite Sunni” will be joining them as well.

They really meant to say “urban Sunni” in contrast to the majority of Syrian rebel fighters who are from rural and poor countryside.

I understand it is quite confusing. Elite is not a compliment word these days. Urban is a correct description but it does not serve the agenda well.

For Syrians who are not with the opposition/rebels, they tend to use “educated, open-minded” to grab the essence of being “urban Sunni” and “ignorant” on those who join the ranks of rebels like blind bats.

A new name caught my eyes today: Urban ghetto gangbanging terrorists. I guess the inventor was trying to describe those who have moved from countryside and settled in the suburban areas of those major cities.

John Kerry has some funny remarks regarding the ranks of the rebels.

It seems very important to picture those people whom you are going to support and give them “correct” definition.

My Message To the Syrian People. 92% of us are NOT with our Government nor the terrorist who they support causing the problems of your Country! We STAND WITH Syria!
My message to the Syrian people

92% of us in the U.S. are AGAINST and do not support our Government attacking your country! We are ONE with you! We Stand with you and not the Terrorist ‘Al Qaeda’ who the U.S. government is backing! We do NOT Stand with the U.S. government in invading your country nor murdering the people there!

We understand it is not humanitarian aid as the reason for the U.S. wanting to attack Syria, it is due to Greed and Control from Saudi Arabia and Israel. We know it was not Assad who committed the chemical attack.http://youtu.be/a1uHxXmBnAQ?t=1s

What are the targets that the United States is going to strike? As we learned from confidential sources, cruise missiles will have to strike Syria’s General Staff of Armed Forces, the headquarters of its intelligence services, the headquarters of the base compounds of the Syrian troops who are successfully suppressing the rebellions that are being paid for by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, military airports, the main air defence units, communications, and military industrial sector objects, with the exception of chemical plants, so as not to cause a mass poisoning of the population. At present, the American, British, French, Saudi, Qatari, Turkish and Jordanian intelligence services are intensely searching for places where President Assad could be hiding, to destroy him with missile strikes, if possible. During the five major U.S. missile strikes on Iraq – during the Gulf War in 1991, in 1992, 1996 and 1998, and during the last aggression against Baghdad in 2003 – Saddam’s number never came up. And it will probably not happen with Assad either – unless there is a traitor in his inner circle.

What will be the point to these attacks, which will require 200 to 300 Tomahawks? Absolutely nothing, if we talk about the balance of power between the government forces and the rebels. Several dozen Syrian soldiers and officers will die, several hundred civilians, but the advantage will remain on the side of Damascus. In military terms, these attacks are more of a loud bang. There are important political overtones – I promised to strike, and did strike, punishing Assad, Obama can publicly declare, as did Clinton in December 1998, saying that the military operation’s goals have been achieved. And then what? Without a ground operation by foreign troops and the introduction of no-fly zones, Syria cannot be beaten. But now Iran and Hezbollah will have all their cards in order to begin to provide massive military assistance to Syria, including ground forces. After all, the country will be subjected to aggression without UN authorization, and in this case, each UN member state should protect the victim of aggression. And Russia will have a free hand in terms of supplying Damascus with state-of-the-art weapons, including S-300 and the latest modification combat aircraft and helicopters. Its military advisors can be sent to Syria to train its army as soon as possible in the use of these weapons.

But after the American aggression, no one will sit down at the negotiating table with the rebels. Washington will have crossed the red line beyond which there is no point of return to a peaceful settlement. After this, even Russia cannot convince Syria to return to the path of a peaceful solution. Syrians have their own national pride. And the United States will have to be prepared for terrorist acts being carried out in its territory or against U.S. diplomatic missions abroad. And it won’t be Damascus that’s behind them, but thousands of Arabs and Muslims around the world, who already hate Washington for its impudence in dealing with the Islamic world. Many are sympathetic to Syria and for them it is a matter of honour to avenge U.S. aggression. But Obama, apparently, does not care. Or he does not understand. The main thing for him is to save his reputation as a world leader, even if up to his elbows in blood. And not the fact that he will have to pay for this with the security of the country and its citizens.

The decline of the American Empire is already coming in the Middle East. It will be followed by its withdrawal from Asia and probably even from Europe. And in Latin America, Washington has long been ousted by Hugo Chavez. Refined European leaders do not want to associate themselves with murderers and rapists. Otherwise, what respect is there for human rights? After all, deliberate murder is murder, no matter what political ranting is used to covere it up. And that’s even if the killer is not a maniac, but the head of a respected (for now, at least) state, which claims to be the leader of the civilized world. Although for civilized Obama, apparently, as in the 19th century, to kill “an Arab barbarian” is a sacred thing in the name of saving the West. But then how does he differ from a typical colonizer in a pith helmet, bludgeoning to death black slaves on the plantations? Apparently, only by his dark skin. Then this is quite shameful! Such a betrayal of the ideas of Martin Luther King Jr., loyalty to which Obama keeps confirming, will not be forgiven by black U.S. voters, on whose support the strength of the Democratic Party is largely based. Not to mention all those billions of people who have not forgotten colonialism and oppression by the West. Obama will thus undermine the trust of more than a hundred countries worldwide to the ideas of European democracy and the civilized values associated with it.

Now seriously, You are wasting your time and mine in a pretzel argument.

I asked you how by visiting a country on a trip paid by the host government, dining and wining, driving around with an entourage of security personnel, and attending a dinner with the first lady would make these people more qualified to judge that country than someone who did not visit with the retard and his wife.

This was the crux of your argument. You either respond to that point or keep quite.

Tara your imagination is running wildly around – like a Taleban theologian’s. From were do you get that information, that those British MPS in question got paid tickets from the host government (Syria)? In your deep blind hate you have obviously the tendency to invent things and connections. Numerous politicians, leaders and businessmen around the world had visited Syria before this present “holy war” begun. Only a total nut believes, that all the visitors became “bribed”.

Of course all quests of all governments around the world are driven around in guarded “form” with some security. That is the norm. If somebody is a quest of the state (any state, not only Syria) it is only natural to dine with the president and his wife, if such event is in the program of that visit. So it will be done in the future Syria, well except women are not allowed to the dinner in the leading “Taleban’s” palace (former presidential palace). The wives are stored, well you know where …

With whom you think the Finnish president dined when she visited Damascus? Does that mean that she became a Muslim, a devoted Baathist and was so impressed of meeting the presidents wife, that she lost all objectivity? Well that our president visited during 12 years tens of countries, some several times. Does it mean that the former president is in the “pocket” of all those several less democratic states and dictatorships she visited, like Syria, Israel, Qatar, China etc?

“The US can do nothing against Iran. Sanctions have failed. They are scared to go war.”

Sanctions are hurting but you are right, we won’t go to war with Iran, (unfortunately), not afraid so much as tired of war. Israel will however and then Iran will drag us into it. Then we will see what we can do to Iran. We may be dragged into war with Iran due to the Syrian bombing, if Obama decides to go ahead despite not getting congressional approval.

“This idea that the president’s credibility’s on the line or the United States’ credibility on the line, merely because he said he would not stand for it, well the constitution means that Americans won’t stand for it, and that’s what the vote’s going to be about.”

The president’s declaration last year that the use of chemical weapons by the Damascus regime would cross a “red line” was “unheard of” the veteran New York Democrat said.

“I love Obama and you’ll never find a truer Democrat than me,” Rangel said. “But this whole idea of any president of the United States drawing lines saying that if any country does something that he considers wrong, that the nation is going to war, it’s unheard of, drawing a red line,” Rangel said.

“So, of course, it’s embarrassing.”

Rangel said he was glad the president reviewed the situation and that broader discussions will occur. Obama submitted a resolution to Congress Saturday to use force in Syria, and the House will take that up the issue after returning from break Sept. 9.

On CNN, Rangel, who has served in the House for 42 years, vehemently opposed the idea of going to war with Syria when so many questions are unanswered.

“There’s absolutely no question I would vote no because there’s so many questions,” he said. “One of them is, is this a war? And if it’s not a war, if it’s a limited war, I never heard of anything in my entire life. If you’re going to fire shells and bomb a community, that’s war, and you have to have a declaration of war, and the Congress should legally, constitutionally approve it and I haven’t seen that evidence.”

In a separate MSNBC interview, Rangel expanded his views to Alex Witt, pointing out that it’s unclear how the “gross violation of international law” affects U.S. citizens. This, he said, is an international issue that should be addressed by the international community.”

Rangel said Syrian President Bashar Assad didn’t strike against the U.S.

The rockets used are sophisticated ones meant to explode an internal devise that would allow for the gas to disperse without being burned. This is the hallmark of a sophisticated weapon the possession of which is only in the hands of the Syrian Regime

It is intertaining to follow the discourse between TARA and SIMOHURTTA and see the contrast between knowledge and ignorance, between depth and shallowness, between logic and illogic, between rational argumentation and emotional nonsense, and between smarts and stupidity.

The denialists of Syria Comment can extend their range with some tips from Foreign Policy, whose stringer cobbled together a new moniker: Chemical Weapons Truthers …

IT WASN’T REALLY NERVE GAS!

The theory: Conspiratorial thinking about chemical weapons use in Syria can also take on a more benign form, as in Truthout’s allegations that U.S. officials have wildly distorted intelligence on the Aug. 21 attack. Truthout points out that it remains unclear who in the Syrian government ordered the attack. But if this is to be cited as the principal failure of U.S. intelligence efforts, it’s certainly odd that administration spokespersons are acknowledging it freely. From there, Truthout’s allegations take a turn for the morbid by casting doubt on claims chemical weapons were used by arguing that certain symptoms consistent with a nerve agent — specifically mass vomiting and diarrhea — appeared not to be present with the victims.

Why it’s crazy: Though there is obviously a debate to had on the lethality of the chemical weapons used in Ghouta, there appears to be little doubt that nerve agents were deployed. None other than Doctors Without Borders, the medical charity whose hospitals treated many of the victims, said that victims’ symptoms matched exposure to a nerve agent, and that’s an assessment most independent experts agree agree with. In casting doubt on reports of chemical weapons usage, Truthout relies on the voluminous video record of the immediate aftermath of the attacks, when social media activists sped to the scene to document the carnage. But if it wasn’t a chemical weapons attack that Syria’s video journalists observed that day, why then did all but one of the media activists at one local coordiantion committee die after spending time filming at the site of the attack?

Rand Paul Assumes There’ll Be a Way to Filibuster the Syria Resolution

After yesterday’s open hearing on the case for airstrikes in Syria, Sen. Rand Paul gave a group of reporters 18 minutes to quiz him on his preferred course of action. His fear, stated simply: Anything we do is likely to make the region messier, so why do anything?

“Is it more or less likely if the region will be more or less stable if we have this attack?” he asked, after I asked him whether he worried about the country losing clout if Congress prevented an airstrike. “Same thing for Israel—is it more or less likely that Israel will be attacked? I think there are valid arguments for saying the region will be more unstable if we get a superpower involved in a civil war, more unstable for Israel if we get a superpower involved and the Syrians feel like they have to show Israel something, or Iran gets involved. Russia feels like they’re losing face and they need to get more involved.” Nobody knew, he said. “It’s all conjecture.”

What did we know? For starters, we knew that there were no “different restrictions on the president, in the Constitution, [regarding] whether it’s a little war.” The idea that strikes on Syria would be limited to just that—strikes, no larger war—was folly. “A lot of people made the mistake of saying that because it’s a small war, or because we’re only using certain types of missiles, we’re not going to call it a war. … Vietnam was that way, Iraq was that way to a certain extent.” And how would it end? “I think it’s almost inevitable there’ll be a second war if Assad falls.”

Paul repeated an argument he’s deployed on a series of TV shows. Assad, for all his faults, is not prosecuting Christians. “The one thing you might say if you wanted to say something good [about him] is that there was some civility there for a generation or more,” said Paul. Compare that with Egypt after the temporary fall of its military-backed dictatorship. “We may well be degrading Assad and allowing radical Islamists to take over the country.”

A Kentucky reporter tried to bring Paul down from theory by saying that Syrian-Americans in his state were worried about the fates of their distant relatives. What would Paul say to them?

“I wish I had a good answer,” he said. “I’ve talked to a lot of Syrian Christians who are now in the United States. Some of them still have family over there. Their biggest concern is Islamic rebels taking over—what will happen to Christians? They were allowed to have their own religion. You see what happens when the radical Islamists take over, the Muslim Brotherhood raging through Coptic neighborhoods in Egypt. If I had a way to wave a magic wand, I would, but it’s chaos over there.”

He didn’t need a wand, anyway; his position was popular. “I was in Kentucky for a month,” he said, “and I went to 40 cities. I didn’t meet one person who was for going into Syria. When I told them I was opposed to it, I got standing ovations.

WASHINGTON — Sen. Chris Murphy voted against President Obama’s plan to take military action against Syria and warned that such an attack could involve the U.S. in the civil war ”in a way that will be difficult to untangle.”

Murphy, D-Conn., was one of two Democrats who joined with five Republicans to vote against the resolution; seven Democrats and three Republicans supported the measure.

”There is not always an American solution to every international crisis. For me, today’s vote was a close call, but in the end, I voted no because I believe that the downside risks of military action, both for U.S. interests and the Syrian people, outweigh the potential benefits.”

The insertion of U.S. military power has the potential ”to further destabilize the nation and propel its descent into chaos,” he said.

Murphy expressed concern that the resolution ”will involve us in the Syrian conflict in a way that will be difficult to untangle. We are naive to believe that our support for the opposition, or opposition to Assad, will end in a matter of months. Taking sides in this conflict will likely commit our country to an open-ended engagement, at an untold cost to both our reputation in the world and to American taxpayers.”

BUFFALO, NY – “The people of the United States are sick and tired of war and we need to nation build at home.”

Those are the words from Congressman Brian Higgins Wednesday. Higgins was present at Wednesday’s foreign affairs committee hearings in Washington where they discussed the situation and justifications of a military strike in Syria.

Higgins says he listened to the speakers which included Secretary of State John Kerry, but he still remains adamantly opposed to any military strike and plans to vote against any resolution the house votes on next week.

“What’s going on in Syria is a civil war, ethnic conflict has nothing to do with freedom and democracy. It’s two sides, one a dictator, the other islamic extremists looking to control the country. There are no good military choices for the United States.”

I am a World War II veteran, and along with 61 percent of the American people, I am saying to President Barack Obama, “Stay the hell out of Syria.” Military power is not the answer to our problems. How many unnecessary wars does it take to prove that?

Why do we continue to send Israel $3 billion every year to feed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war machine while millions of American children go to bed hungry every night? The Republicans in the House voted to cut food stamps but to take care of the large corporate farms. Child hunger is only one of the problems the United States has at home. Others include education, infrastructure, housing and health care.

It is not over in Maloula, locals can still hear gun fire and there was three air raids on that little town. This shows the type of people who control the rebel movement, they attacked a small village which is a Christian symbol and an attraction for Christians from all over the world, let their thugs roam the streets chanting “Allahu Akbar” at the door of the main church in town (seen from a video supplied by rebels).
These are not freedom fighters, they are animals who are a disgrace to Islam and humanity, the place has no military significance and had little protection because nobody thought it will be a target. Go to Maloula’s facebook page and read more on the subject, the problem now is that the army can not leave those terrorists inside Maloula and those bastards will probably hide inside houses and churches as usual, and before you know it there will be destruction in that living piece of history.
(awlad kalb bidoun sharaf)

Thanks and keep those revelations on Iran coming. It deserves a lot more attention, and it could be getting some it’s not equipped for if the airstrikes start.

The Mullahs need to stoke secular wars outside to maintain their theocracy domestically. It’s on thin ground at home – if you visit Iran it’s a shock to see how few people actually bother with the mosque. But for those “leaders” it’s the theocracy or nothing, as their cupboard is empty of ways to advance or transition the country in any direction domestically.

Significantly, Iran is weak in conventional military strength. It’s never rebuilt or modernized its armed forces since taking a beating in the war with Iraq.

So Iran relies heavily on sponsorship of terrorism and its puppets Malaki in Iraq and Assad in Syria to build its influence in the region, stay in the game internationally and keep itself noticed. And of course there’s its nuclear diplomatic bluffing and blustering.

Which might make the Mullahs feel self-important and smug, but back home has delivered crippling sanctions and deepening economic disaster, social repression and a desperate wish by most skilled young Iranians that they could live in the west.

I have asked this question a few times on this board but got no responses. So I will ask again.

There are people on this forum who obviously love Assad and hate the west (mainly the United States). Yet, these people live in the United States, and have lived there since before the revolution. Why did you leave the country you love, led by the leader you glorify, to go live in an evil country controlled by evil people which had, as you say, been plotting to get rid of your beloved leader since 2005?

The time is running out, the S day is scheduled on September 9, when the Congress is almost sure to give President Obama a carte blanche on Syria. The closer the date, the more dirty secrets become known by the World…

It’s now clear that in the second half of August, as soon as the political situation in Egypt became less explosion-prone, the Qatar and Saudi Arabia Wahabiite monarchies have applied an unprecedented amount of pressure on the White House, especially on President Obama himself. The unnamed sources of the certain Persian Gulf countries have confined to the international press that Riyadh and Doha have resorted to the most vulgar of all means – bribery. The high profile officials were not simply provided with handsome sums for the green old age, they were promised to receive extensive investments in the US economy. Should one doubt the fact that the countries that most Americans are unable to find on the map are bribing their officials, he can remember the FIFA 2022 story, when Doha competing for the honor to host this event against the world’s best football grands has somehow managed to come first. Bribery and corruption – are the common day practices for the Wahabiite monarchies that they use on the regular basis in order to gain certain advantages over their rivals. After paying Obama these “powers” are now busy trying to sweeten the pill up for the US senators and congressmen after having the deal signed and sealed with both the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. So it’s pretty sure that Obama will get his permission to strike Syria.

But the two angry Wahabiite leprechauns weren’t satisfied with the value for money the White House had presented them with. They were especially discontented with the Obama’s claim to use cruise missiles in order to punish the Assad regime. They decided to invest a couple more billions in order to transform a short-term campaign into a full scale military engagement that should last for three or four months. The United States won’t be using the 420 cruise missiles that are nearing their out of service date alone, but their bombers as well in order to reach the underground targets . The USA fighters are going to patrol the borders of the Syrian aerial space, shooting on sight every aircraft they will come across. This will be equivalent to the creation of a “no fly zone” but without the UN approval. A similar “no-fly zone” was created in Libya, but this time around the Washington war hawks are short on allies.

Turkey, the former long-time supporter of the Assad regime, is first in line to bomb its former ally. The French are trailing behind, but still they are pretty sure to join the party. The two angry leprechauns – Saudi Arabia and Qatar are willing to provide whatever they can in terms of air-force. It’s still unclear where the Israeli standing in this story is. Tel-Aviv won’t be very contended with the radical Islamists at the head of the Syrian state, but at the same time Assad regime is a hell of a thorn in the flesh. The USA got some funny friends in this conflict, but the money proposed by the Wahabiite monarchies are too good to refuse………

……
Than common sense implies if the United States are playing a fair game on the Middle East, than they should launch an attack against the rebels and eliminate all the leaders of the numerous groups fighting against Assad, but still outside of the Syrian territory. The White House have signed all the anti-terrorist international conventions long time ago, shouldn’t it be fighting terrorists than? The next step is to fire the darned 420 cruise missiles on Saudi Arabia and Qatar, taking the leaders of these two countries in the Guantanamo prison. But none of this will happen since the double standards of Washington are well-known around the Globe.

September 9 – is a milestone in history, a turning point that will change international law once and for all. Nobody can predict the outcome of the events to come, but the American leaders have already condemned themselves. People in the United States don’t recognize their leaders anymore. The Western wold is falling apart, the Middle East becomes even more radical in its anger. Guess what, that’s exactly the thing Saudi Arabia and Qatar needed to recreate Arabic Caliphate. Once they’ve done with the West they will only have to destabilize Russia and than they can rule the world at their leisure.

There’s still time to evade the inevitable, but chips are already placed at the table. Time is running out – the war for the Middle East is dawning…
Author: Viktor Titov

How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you make outrageous claims like these?

If this claim is accurate, wouldn’t be so easy to prove it? The photos and videos of the children killed are all on youtube, why don’t their supposed parents in those Latakia villages step up and claim them?

The minorities of the Middle East are in danger and getting killed and displaced. Obama and the Cameron and the Frenchie are letting them butchered. Look what happened to the world’s Christian treasure: Ma’lula you know what is going to happen to the minorities of the Middle East.

The minorities in Syria have oppressed and killed Syrians for the last 40 years. They are now crying foul tears just because they see a democratic Syria coming where they lose their privileges and elite status and get treated equally. They are now playing victims but no one is fooled. Thank God for the presence of foreign embassies and foreign intelligence in a country like Syria where fabrication, lies, and propaganda are now part of the genetic make up of the so-called minorities.

The hysteria unraveling by the loyalists on SC is unprecedented. The supporters were part of grinding killing machine that had no mercy and that they cheered, lied for, defended with every tool they could possibly utilize.

An appeal to the conscientious citizens of the world who are against the American attack on Syria:

Egyptian citizens, activists, artists and intellectuals are launching an initiative to gather volunteers to protect the Syrian infrastructure targeted by the impending American attack.

The volunteers will surround targeted buildings, airports and other critical sites, acting as human shields, in an attempt to expose the atrocities of war, and the hypocrisy of the American administration.

Egyptian writer and activist Eyad Harfoush, who started the initiative, is naming it after the Syrian officer Gol Gamal, who volunteered to help the Egyptian army during the 1956 War, sacrificing his life defend the Egyptian borders.

Harfoush is calling conscientious citizens from all over the world to participate in the initiative, to say NO to the American attack on Syria: “Let’s not stand helpless while the American administration launches another war, and destroys another Arab country.”

Some Sunnis expats are extatic that Maaloula will fall in the hands of other Sunnis. They know where is Disneyland but they probably don’t even know where that ancient city is and they don’t care, it’s christian and the christians have “oppressed the weak sunnis for decades” and must pay now. It’s time for revenge.
Their hatred and hypocritical attitude for the minorities in Syria is exposed at daylight.
This is the kind of talk that shows in what deep crisis identity some Syrian Sunnis are. They reject the minorities of their own country to associate themselves with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the most ridiculously impotent, vicious, pathetic and cynical people of the region.
These Sunnis expats have the friend they deserve and who resemble them: rich and sick in the head.

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis has urged leaders of the Group of 20 to abandon the “futile pursuit” of a military solution in Syria and work instead for dialogue and negotiation to end the conflict.

In a letter Thursday to the G-20 host, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Francis lamented that “one-sided interests” had prevailed in Syria, preventing a peaceful solution and allowing the continued “senseless massacre” of innocents.

Francis has ratcheted up his call for peace in Syria amid threatened U.S.-led military strikes following a chemical weapons attack.

He will host a peace vigil in St. Peter’s Square on Saturday. On Thursday, the Vatican summoned ambassadors accredited to the Holy See to outline its position, calling for the respect for all minorities including Christians and that Syria’s opposition forces distance themselves from extremists.

The Geneva conference he planned in May never happened, dialog with the Russians has become poisonous and the Israel- Palestinian negotiations are going nowhere.

His latest assignment was to convince the American that the strikes are necessary. As the arguments are weak and will convince nobody, he start lying.
First he lied about the number of casualties, declaring 1,429 when all the reliable source don’t put them over 500.
Now he is saying that the opposition is becoming moderate, when all information coming from everywhere point to exactly the contrary.

Making the case for President Obama’s plan to bomb Syria Tuesday, Secretary of State John Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the opposition to the Assad regime was becoming more moderate. But fresh reports from Syria show that Kerry’s picture of the conflict just isn’t true.

At Tuesday’s hearing, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., asked Kerry, “It seems like initially, the opposition was maybe more Western-leaning, more moderate, more democratic, and as time has gone by, it’s degraded, become more infiltrated by al Qaeda … is that basically true?”

Perhaps Kerry has his conflicts muddled, because it’s difficult to see how a failure to strike Syria will ’embolden’ AQ. There seems to be unanimity in the assessment that ‘AQ and AQ affiliates’ are playing a major role in fighting with forces loyal to Bashar al-Assad – perhaps the leading role due to their superior fighting skills and commitment to jihadist goals. It’s quite obvious that any strike on Assad’s forces or infrastructure will be useful assistance to opposition forces including AQ.
Kerry would struggle to argue convincingly that US strikes will not embolden Al Qaeda in Syria.

“We all have a duty to act, and the European Union believes that efforts should be developed towards a political solution for the conflict and the European Union is indeed providing relief, more than EUR 1.3 bn so far, for the people on the ground suffering the consequences of this most dramatic situation,” Barroso said.

Hillary Clinton is obviously unconvinced of the necessity of strikes. That’s why she is not taking a clear stand about the strikes as it may affect her candidacy for presidency in 2016 if it turns out to be a bad idea.
She is just waiting to see where the wind blows and will adapt her position accordingly.

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear the cost and to assist, the answer is profoundly yes, they have. That offer is on the table,” Kerry said as he appeared before a House of Representatives panel on Wednesday.

The offer was “quite significant,” he said.

“Some of them (Arab regimes) have said that if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost. That’s how dedicated they are to this,” Al-Alam reported.

But he stressed, “Obviously, that is not in the cards and nobody is talking about it, but they are talking about taking seriously getting this job done.”

Butheina Shaaban is lying flagrantly, no one believes her yet she finds no shame in obvious lie,she is flouting morality, to claim the kids are Alawi kids kidnapped and murdered is so shameful lie she must be turning crazy
I believe Apple Mini is a copy of Butheina Shaaban

Just so you may know, we now have a most important heads up ready for revelation.

As you may know, we revealed few days ago German Intelligence findings about the direct link between criminal pervert, Al-Assad, and the Aug. 21 crime against humanity.

It is now revealed by the same Intelligence agency that a mistake was made in measuring the amount of gas to be mixed and delivered by 106mm missiles to the site of the massacre. The Intelligence indicated that criminal pervert, B. Al-Assad, intention was to use smaller amount on the same scale used by him in other similar attacks, which he considered acceptable to Obama and other world leaders since the attacks went by with no incident or response.

Following this revelation, the regime of criminal perverts, sent out feelers to various capitals, indicating its willingnes to opologize for the mistake of mis-measurement and promises not to repeat it again by assigning more competent technicians in future attacks to deliver precise amounts of sarin, on order not to exceed the previous levels that seemed to be acceptable. Of course the intention behind the apology is to convince the coalition to quit the attack, go home, and let criminal pervert to administer sarin gas delivery with utmost precision from now on.

It has also been revealed that Al-Assad promised to use the expertise of Russian technicians in future attacks and not to rely on the incompetent shabiha who caused such great discomfort to their master.

PUTIN GREETS OBAMA WITH SYRIA THREAT – President Obama arrived in Russia today to find the already failing relations with his host in even worse condition. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s threat to provide his Syrian allies with a missile shield in the event of U.S. air strikes further complicates Obama’s flagging effort to win international support for an attack on Damascus. As the Guardian reports, Putin’s warning that an attack without UN backing would provoke military aid from Russia may drive away the handful of international partners for Obama’s proposed attack.